TPO 41
The reading and the lecture discuss setting much stricter regulation for handling and storing of a wast product called coal ash that is produced in power plants. The reading presents three arguments that representatives of power companies state in oppose to this subject. Whereas, the professor disagrees with these reasons and explains why none of them are convincing.
First, the passage claims there is enough effective regulation already. The reading mentions the example of the liner as a material that all plant use. however, the professor argues against this opinion by pointing out that the existing regulations are not sufficient at all. she mentions some old power plants that their harmful waste materials have leaked to drinking water sources and contaminated that because old plants are allowed to work without the liner. Thus, it is necessary to set new regulations.
Second, the reading suggests stricter regulations will discourage plants to recycle their coal ashes. however, the lecturer refutes this argument completely. she believes that setting stricter regulations will not be related to the recycling of coal ash. she mentions Mercury as a hazardous material that although a lot of strict regulations had been set for its handling and storing, consumers are intended still to use products that are made by recycled materials.
Finally, the reading claims because of the increase in power companies' costs, the price of electricity would increase that would not be general public. however, the professor argues against this claim by adding that although stricter regulation will increase the costs of power plants about 15 billion dollars, it will increase consumers’ electricity bill just about 1% and this price isn't much for saving the environment.
although the passage states three reasons to argue against setting new rules, the professor in the lecture refutes all of them and explain why they aren't convincing at all.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 153, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...liner as a material that all plant use. however, the professor argues against this opin...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 277, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
... regulations are not sufficient at all. she mentions some old power plants that the...
^^^
Line 5, column 103, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...age plants to recycle their coal ashes. however, the lecturer refutes this argument com...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 159, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...turer refutes this argument completely. she believes that setting stricter regulati...
^^^
Line 5, column 256, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...e related to the recycling of coal ash. she mentions Mercury as a hazardous materia...
^^^
Line 7, column 137, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ricity would increase that would not be general public. however, the professor argues against ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 153, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...rease that would not be general public. however, the professor argues against this clai...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 391, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...icity bill just about 1% and this price isnt much for saving the environment. alth...
^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Although
...isnt much for saving the environment. although the passage states three reasons to arg...
^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 149, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
...efutes all of them and explain why they arent convincing at all.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, second, so, still, thus, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1653.0 1373.03311258 120% => OK
No of words: 307.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38436482085 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18585898806 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69116097603 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.524429967427 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 494.1 419.366225166 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.3675991238 49.2860985944 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.2 110.228320801 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4666666667 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.8 7.06452816374 54% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 4.19205298013 239% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.377461774268 0.272083759551 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124073039258 0.0996497079465 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0970499869878 0.0662205650399 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.197624688578 0.162205337803 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0944246965807 0.0443174109184 213% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.2367328918 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 63.6247240618 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.