The graph below shows the proportion of four different materials that were recycled from 1982 to 2010 in a particulare country.
The line graph illustrate the recycling rate for selected materials from 1982 to 2010. The vertical line describes that year and horizontal line defines the percentage amount of recycled.
In 1982, 60% of paper and cardboard had recycled, but in 1994 it steadily raised up to at 80%, after that, however, it decreased rapidly at 70% in 2010.
The half percentage of glass containers had recycled in 1982, it declined at 40% in 1987, after that, however, it increased steadily at 60% in 2008. There ia no data recorded for aluminium cans in 1982, from 1982 to 2008 it had reached at from 1% to 35% recycled. Plastics recycled in 1986 at about 0.5% and reached at 9% constantly in 2009.
Overall, the proportion of paper and cardboard that was the highest of the four classes of material, but from 1994, it declined steadily in the percentage, where, rest of the materials were continuing in upward trend in their percentage.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-08-16 | Hardik3011 | 78 | view |
- At the present time, the population of some countries includes a relatively large number of young adults, compared with number of older people.Do the advantage of this situation outweigh the disadvantages? 56
- Some people believe that it is good to share information as much as possible in scientific research, buisness and the acadamic world. Others believe that some information is too important or too valuable to be shared freely.Discuss both these views and gi 61
- Some peoplw believe that it is good to share information as much as possible in scientific research, buisness and the acadamic world. Others believe that some information is too important or too valuable to be shared freely.Discuss both these views and gi 61
- Some people believe that it is good to share information as much as possible in scientific research, buisness and the acadamic world. Others believe that some information is too important or too valuable to be shared freely.Discuss both these views and gi 73
- Research indicates that the characteristics we are born with have much influence on our personality and development than any other experience we may have in our life Which do you consider to be the major influence 71
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 2.0 7.0 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 5.60731707317 196% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 38.0 33.7804878049 112% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 767.0 965.302439024 79% => OK
No of words: 160.0 196.424390244 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.79375 4.92477711251 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.55655882008 3.73543355544 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65223225557 2.65546596893 100% => OK
Unique words: 89.0 106.607317073 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.55625 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 214.2 283.868780488 75% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 1.53170731707 261% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => 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: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.9281206151 43.030603864 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.571428571 112.824112599 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8571428571 22.9334400587 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.71428571429 5.23603664747 33% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.224741485199 0.215688989381 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111706786281 0.103423049105 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0994885963943 0.0843802449381 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130572145577 0.15604864568 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0469149026672 0.0819641961636 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.2329268293 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 74.53 61.2550243902 122% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 10.3012195122 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.8 11.4140731707 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.98 8.06136585366 99% => OK
difficult_words: 33.0 40.7170731707 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.