The graph below shows the amounts of waste produced by three companies over a period of 15 years.
The line graph compares three companies in terms of their waste output between the years 2000 and 2015.
It is clear that there were significant changes in the amounts of waste produced by three companies shown on the graph. While companies A and B saw falls in waste output, the amount of waste of company C increased over the period of 15 years.
In 2000, companies A and B produced 12 tons and 8 tons of waste respectively, and the amount of waste output of company C was the lowest, at only 4 tons. Over the following five years, while companies B and C saw increases in waste materials by about 2 tons for each company, the amount of waste produced by company A decreased around 1 ton.
From 2005 to 2015, we can see that companies A and B cut their waste by 4 tons and 7 tons respectively, the company C’s waste output rose considerably by 6 tons over the 10-year period. By 2015, the amounts of waste produced by companies A and B fell to only 8 tons and only 3 tons, and the figure for company C was 10 tons.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-12-13 | Wardiati Yusuf | 60 | view |
| 2023-12-04 | klnhhhh01 | 70 | view |
| 2023-11-11 | Daniel3003 | 67 | view |
| 2023-11-11 | Daniel3003 | 67 | view |
| 2023-11-11 | Daniel3003 | 67 | view |
- Some people say that the main environmental problem of our time is the loss of particular species of plants and animals Others say that there are more important environmental problems Discuss both these views and give your own opinion 73
- The most important aim of science should be to improve people s lives 61
- The diagram below shows the life cycle of a salmon from egg to adult fish 61
- The chart below shows the number of households in the US by their annual income in 2007 2011 and 2015 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The diagram below shows the manufacturing process for making sugar from sugar canes Summerise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 6.8 162% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 33.7804878049 98% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 830.0 965.302439024 86% => OK
No of words: 194.0 196.424390244 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.27835051546 4.92477711251 87% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.73207559907 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51499911203 2.65546596893 95% => OK
Unique words: 90.0 106.607317073 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.463917525773 0.547539520022 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 242.1 283.868780488 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.2 1.45097560976 83% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => 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: 27.0 22.4926829268 120% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 30.717275602 43.030603864 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.571428571 112.824112599 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.7142857143 22.9334400587 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.28571428571 5.23603664747 25% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
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: 0.0 4.09268292683 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.450558622906 0.215688989381 209% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.266905067013 0.103423049105 258% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0697650788594 0.0843802449381 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.327042889323 0.15604864568 210% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.108241804591 0.0819641961636 132% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.2329268293 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 77.91 61.2550243902 127% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.3012195122 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 7.84 11.4140731707 69% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.6 8.06136585366 82% => OK
difficult_words: 20.0 40.7170731707 49% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.9970731707 116% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.