integ 41
In the reading, the author provides three arguments which state that representatives of power companies think that there is no need for new and strict regulations to prevent releasing coal ash into the environment. However, finding all the ideas questionable and implausible, the lecturer casts doubt on each of the author's reason and present some evidence to the contrary.
First of all, the author claims that there are enough regulations at this time. Companies should use a liner in order to avoid leaking the coal ash into the soil. Conversely, the lecturer repudiates this point by explaining that current regulations are not adequate because factories just utilize the liner in their new landfills or ponds. However, the old disposal sites would not have the liner so, the harmful chemicals permeate into the ground water and will pollute it which is hazardous for people's health. As it turns out; new regulations should be applied for both old and new disposal places.
Furthermore, the author holds the view that by assigning new and strict regulations people would dissuade to recycle of coal ash into other products due to the fact that recycled materials are too harmful. In contrast, the lecturer asserts that the people do not be concerned about recycling goods because if we consider other dangerous materials like mercury that has strict regulations, people utilize it for 50 years without any concern.
Finally, the passage of the reading mentions that by these tough laws, the general public should pay more for electricity due to price augmentation of handling and storing coal ash. On the contrary, the lecturer refutes this reason. According to her, although storing and handling these hazardous chemical substances are costly, people should pay extra money just one percent more than before which would be invaluable for having a clean environment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 76, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... mentions that by these tough laws, the general public should pay more for electricity due to ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, so, in contrast, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1580.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 302.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23178807947 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1687104957 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65924346536 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 145.348785872 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.576158940397 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 476.1 419.366225166 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.620861829 49.2860985944 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.666666667 110.228320801 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1666666667 21.698381199 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.33333333333 7.06452816374 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 13.3589403974 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 53.8541721854 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.0289183223 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.35 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.7273730684 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => 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.