Burning coal in power plants produces a waste product called coal ash, a material that contains small amounts of potentially harmful chemicals. Environmentalists in the United States are concerned about the damage such harmful chemicals may be doing to the environment and suggest that the United States government should create new, much stricter regulations for handling and storing coal ash.
However, representatives of power companies take the opposite view: they argue that new regulations are unnecessary and might actually have negative consequences. They use the following arguments to support their position.
Regulations Exist
First, power company representatives point out that effective environmental regulations already exist. For example, one very important regulation requires companies to use liner—special material that prevents coal ash components from leaking into the soil and contaminating the surrounding environment. Companies that dispose of coal ash in disposal ponds or landfills must use liner in every new pond or landfill they build.
Concerns About Recycling Coal Ash
Second, some analysts predict that creating very strict rules for storing and handling coal ash might discourage the recycling of coal ash into other products. Currently, a large portion of coal ash generated by power plants is recycled: it is used, for example, in building materials such as concrete and bricks. Recycling coal ash reduces the need to dispose of it in other ways and presents no environmental danger. However, if new, stricter rules are adopted for handling coal ash, consumers may become concerned that recycled coal ash products are just too dangerous, and may stop buying the products.
Increased Cost
Finally, strict new regulations would result in a significant increase in disposal and handling costs for the power companies—perhaps as much as ten times the current costs. Power companies would be forced to increase the price of electricity, which would not be welcomed by the general public.
The reading and the lecture are both about whether the regulation are necessary for handling and sorting coal ash. While the author of the article argues that new regulations are unnecessary and might have negative impact, the lecturer disputes the claims mentioned in the article. Her position is that it is definitely need to enact strict regulations.
First, the reading claims that effective environmental regulations already exist for requiring companies to use liner to prevent coal ash from leaking into soil and contaminating the surrounding environment. However, the lecturer refutes this point by saying that recently regulations are not strict enough because only new landfills need to use liner, and the old ones don't need to use liner which cause damage to the environment.
Secondly, the article points out that creating very strict rules, customers may become concerned that recycled coal ash products are too dangerous and may stop buying the products. In contrast, the lecturer argues that mercurrial used to put on strict rules on them to ensure its refills are safety, and customers were not afraid to buy it.
Finally, the author notes that strict regulations would result in significant increase in disposal and handling costs which might increase the price of electricity. The lecturer opposed this point by explaining that indeed the cost will increase, but the protective result will improve. Also, the price of electricity on household will only increase 1%.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-03 | YasamanEsml | 80 | view |
| 2023-06-11 | Vivian Chang | 3 | view |
| 2023-06-09 | Zmx_6 | 80 | view |
| 2023-06-09 | Zmx_6 | 3 | view |
| 2023-04-01 | tststs | 3 | view |
- The Phoenicians The Phoenicians were an ancient civilization that emerged in the eastern Mediterranean around 1500 BCE They were known for their seafaring skills and played a significant role in trade and commerce While some historians have suggested that 80
- Paradox of Choice First give yourself three minutes to read this article Many people believe in a phenomenon called the paradox of choice Basically this is the idea that having too many options to choose from is a bad thing because it can lead to feelings 88
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Workers are more satisfied when they have many different types of tasks to do during the workday than when they do similar tasks all day long Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 60
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Nowadays it is better for children to grow up in the countryside than in a large city Use specific reasons and examples to develop your essay 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Workers are more satisfied when they have many different types of tasks to do during the workday than when they do similar tasks all day long Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 321, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'needed'.
Suggestion: needed
.... Her position is that it is definitely need to enact strict regulations. First, ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 371, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...lls need to use liner, and the old ones dont need to use liner which cause damage to...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, while, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1258.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 235.0 270.72406181 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.35319148936 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.91531732006 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70661045478 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.578723404255 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 388.8 419.366225166 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.3596068293 49.2860985944 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.8 110.228320801 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5 21.698381199 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.5 7.06452816374 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0790232751236 0.272083759551 29% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.032179025185 0.0996497079465 32% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0501656767412 0.0662205650399 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0486814725377 0.162205337803 30% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0336508449031 0.0443174109184 76% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.3589403974 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 53.8541721854 74% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.05 12.2367328918 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.21 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.7273730684 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.