The pie charts below show units of electricity production by fuel source Australia and France in 1980 and 2000.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The presented pie charts compare the amount of electricity production from fuel sources measured in units between France and Australia in 1980 and 2000. At the onset, Coal served as the main source for electricity production in Australia over the time, whilst France utilized nuclear power as a source of electricity mostly by 2000.
As is shown in the illustration, total production in Australia surged from 100 units in 1980 to 170 units in 2000 although nuclear power was not used as an electricity source. In 1980, coal constituted 50% of total. The remainder, on the other hand, was produced from natural gas, hydro power (each producing 20 units) and oil was only 10 units. By 2000, coal was still significant source for electricity production, with 130 units among 170 in total. Remarkably, only hydro power experienced a slight increase of 16 units, whereas, the others accounted for 4% collectively.
In comparison, from 1980 to 2000, electricity production in France doubled, rising from 90 units to 180 units. In 1980, natural gas supplied 25 units, which matched by coal. The remaining 40 units was produced from oil, nuclear power and hydro power. But by 2000, nuclear power turned into the main source, with only 15 units in 1980 ascending noticably up to 126 units in 2000. Coal and oil, in contrast, together produced 50 units among 180 units in total, and the others only took up marginal percentages.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 250, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...total. The remainder, on the other hand, was produced from natural gas, hydro pow...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, so, still, whereas, in contrast, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 0.0 5.60731707317 0% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 33.7804878049 136% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 3.97073170732 151% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1186.0 965.302439024 123% => OK
No of words: 238.0 196.424390244 121% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98319327731 4.92477711251 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92775363542 3.73543355544 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68695097262 2.65546596893 101% => OK
Unique words: 121.0 106.607317073 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.508403361345 0.547539520022 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 342.0 283.868780488 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 11.0 3.36585365854 327% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 8.94146341463 134% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.6263461315 43.030603864 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.8333333333 112.824112599 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8333333333 22.9334400587 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.91666666667 5.23603664747 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.09268292683 195% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.278868511225 0.215688989381 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.126149326171 0.103423049105 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112703097959 0.0843802449381 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.240313901792 0.15604864568 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.112201623765 0.0819641961636 137% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.2329268293 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 61.2550243902 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 10.3012195122 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 11.4140731707 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.56 8.06136585366 94% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 40.7170731707 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.