Tpo41
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.
Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific arguments presented in the reading passage.
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 lecture are both about new regulation for handling the coal and storing the ashes of coal. The author of the reading feels that the current regulation will not harmful and dangerous for the environment. The lecturer challenges the claim made by the author. He expresses that current rules are not sufficient for handeling the ashes. He expresses doubt about the explanation of the claim for three reasons.
To begin with, the author states that the present regulation is enough because the liner which is used for preventing the leakage of the coal in the soil. The specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that linear is not sufficient for prevention of contaminating the groundwater. Additionally, he says that liner is used in every ponds and landfill before the dispose of is not enough and it could toxic the rural living area.
Second, the writer suggests that strict regulation and laws could dispersuade the consumer for using the other product. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by mentioning that Mercury is one of the hazardous element and also difficult to dispose. He elaborates on this by bringing up the point that the people still using the Mercury about 50 years with maintaining the rules and regulation.
Third, the author posits that cost will increase this disposal and eventually it increases the cost of electricity. In contrast,
the lecturer's position is that sometimes advantage is worth more than an expense. He notes that analyst implementing the bill is 15 billion dollars and electricity cost only increase 1 percent which is not too much. Moreover, general people can afford this expense.
- In Megalopolis, the number of law school graduates who went to work for large, corporate firms declined by 15% over the last three years, whereas an increasing number of graduates took jobs at small, general practice firms. Even though large firms usually 63
- Last year PrepUp had record enrollment in their test prep courses, but yearly profits fellby nearly 30 percent. To the contrary, TopPreparation had comparable enrollment to the year before,with profits rising by approximately 20 percent. This discrepancy 60
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?It is better to have broad knowledge of many academic subjects to to specialize in one specific subject.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Imagine that you are in a classroom or a meeting. The teacher or the meeting leader says something incorrect. In your opinion,which of the following is the best thing to do?1）Interrupt and correct th 60
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?In the past it was easier to identify what type of career or job would lead to a secure, successful future.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 220, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...mful and dangerous for the environment. The lecturer challenges the claim made by t...
^^^
Line 5, column 374, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...used in every ponds and landfill before the dispose of is not enough and it could toxic the...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, moreover, second, so, still, third, in contrast, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1403.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 272.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15808823529 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70869568821 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 145.348785872 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.540441176471 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 423.0 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.5162623774 49.2860985944 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.6875 110.228320801 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 21.698381199 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.375 7.06452816374 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.287645234927 0.272083759551 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0876649119849 0.0996497079465 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107066357145 0.0662205650399 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136464446444 0.162205337803 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0828646707415 0.0443174109184 187% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.78 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.