TPO 41 Question 1
The reading claims that new regulations are not vital and might have negative consequences and provide three reason to support it. However, the lecturer finds all ideas dubious and presents some evidence to refute them all.
First, the author argues that effective environmental regulations already exist. Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that the regulations that already exist are not sufficient. For exmaply the regulation about liner-special material are devoted only to old lands not new lands.
Furthermore, the reading posits that some analysts say that making new rules for storing an handling coal ash might have negative effect on the recycling of coal ash. On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that making new rules does not necessaritely stop consumers to buy the products. She used another material as an example to illustrate the fact that making new rules did not make consumers afraid to buy the material.
Finally, the reading holds the view that making new rules can affect power companies' bussines by increasing their costs. In contrast the speaker dismissed this issue due to the fact that although this assertion might be true, in this case it is well worth it. Since the extra cost is about 50 bilion dollars and might seem too much, if we do the math, we can realize that it's only 1% of the companies profite so it's worth it to spend this money for having a clear environment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 90, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...s say that making new rules for storing an handling coal ash might have negative e...
^^
Line 7, column 125, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: contrast,
... bussines by increasing their costs. In contrast the speaker dismissed this issue due to...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, so, well, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 19.0 30.3222958057 63% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1195.0 1373.03311258 87% => OK
No of words: 239.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93187294222 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59013051927 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.602510460251 0.540411800872 111% => OK
syllable_count: 364.5 419.366225166 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => 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: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.2092175836 49.2860985944 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.636363636 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7272727273 21.698381199 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.36363636364 7.06452816374 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.321770744652 0.272083759551 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112988299303 0.0996497079465 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100374632027 0.0662205650399 152% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162785132046 0.162205337803 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0698583825556 0.0443174109184 158% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.72 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.