The chart below shows waste collection by a recycling centre from 2011 to 2015.
The bar chart gives information about changes in the amount of waste collected by a recycling centre during the period from 2011 to 2015.
Overall, there were general fluctuations in four different types of waste over the given period. It is also clear that the total collection of paper waste was higher than the others, except for the year 2013 when glass waste was the most common type.
In 2011, 57 tons of paper waste was collected for recycling, followed by 48 tons of glass. Afterward, the amount of paper waste collected saw a remarkable decrease to 40 tons in the following two years before steeply rising to reach its peak of 70 tons in 2015. Over the same period, the figures for glass varied constantly between 41 and 52 tons.
In comparison, the waste collected from tins was similar to that of garden, ranging from 27 to 35 tons. However, the year 2012 witnessed a noticeable difference. 27 tons of waste came from tins, which was twice as high as the figure for garden, with only 15 tons.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-12-10 | Trần Ánh Vy | 67 | view |
| 2024-11-19 | hahoaan | 78 | view |
| 2024-11-12 | Huyenlbg87 | 84 | view |
| 2024-11-10 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
| 2024-11-10 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
- Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste 67
- The pie charts below show information about where coffee is produced consumed where its profit goes 67
- It is important for all towns and cities to have large outdoor public spaces such as squared and parks Do you agree or disagree with this statement 78
- The charts show the difference in how three countries learn English in 2010 and 2015 75
- The graph shows the percentage of university students in 18 25 years old in four countries between 1961 and 2011 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, except for
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 6.8 15% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 33.7804878049 101% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 832.0 965.302439024 86% => OK
No of words: 179.0 196.424390244 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.64804469274 4.92477711251 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.65774358864 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.38855400295 2.65546596893 90% => OK
Unique words: 108.0 106.607317073 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.603351955307 0.547539520022 110% => OK
syllable_count: 240.3 283.868780488 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.8912567479 43.030603864 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.4444444444 112.824112599 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8888888889 22.9334400587 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.66666666667 5.23603664747 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 1.13902439024 527% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.305332564387 0.215688989381 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.129665890222 0.103423049105 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.136112424513 0.0843802449381 161% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.218008996936 0.15604864568 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.148810351151 0.0819641961636 182% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.4 13.2329268293 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 77.57 61.2550243902 127% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 10.3012195122 70% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.69 11.4140731707 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.58 8.06136585366 94% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 40.7170731707 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.