In this set of materials, the reading passage argues that new regulations for handling and storing coal ash is unnecessary. However, the lecturer finds all the idea dubious and provides some reason to refute them all.
First of all, the author of the passage claims that existing is enough to prevent environmental damage. On the contrary, the professor contends that current regulations force companies to use liner material when they dispose them to new ponds and lands. Stricter regulation is needed to make them use it when they discard them in old location because they can leak to drink water and contaminate it. Therefore, current law is not sufficient.
Furthermore, it is mentioned in the passage that consumer will stop using recycled products of coal ash because they consider them as dangerous materials. Conversely, the lecturer believes that if we look at other hazardous materials such as mercury, we can see that for more than 50 years, handling and storing of mercury were strict but people buy recycled items. Hence, people will not get afraid of recycled goods.
Finally, the reading asserts that new regulations will increase the cost for power companies and the result is higher price of electricity for general public. In contrast, the lecturer states that although this state is true, it increases the price of it just one percent which is not too much for people. Thus, the cost is not a convincing reason to do not regulate new rules.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 144, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...sult is higher price of electricity for general public. In contrast, the lecturer states that ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, look, so, therefore, thus, in contrast, such as, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 21.0 30.3222958057 69% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1227.0 1373.03311258 89% => OK
No of words: 244.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.02868852459 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95227774224 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60736596902 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.594262295082 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 373.5 419.366225166 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.5507769536 49.2860985944 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.25 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3333333333 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.0 7.06452816374 170% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.392485205359 0.272083759551 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123183646014 0.0996497079465 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0956979824841 0.0662205650399 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.21009850425 0.162205337803 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0282050145346 0.0443174109184 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.