The city council of Town X has proposed reducing the city’s electric expenses by switching all the lights in public buildings from incandescent bulbs to light-emitting diodes (LEDs). The switch would be made gradually as the old incandescent bulbs burn out, and the city council reasons that since LED lights burn brighter and cost no more to purchase, the switch would help Town X save money on electrical costs in the future.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered to help evaluate the efficacy of the city council’s proposal to save money on electrical costs. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the council’s prediction.
According to the editorial, city council's proposal considers one possible solution for reduction of electric spendings of the city. He suggests to change incandescent bulbs to LEDs. The main reason for such change, as the council states, is that they burn brighter and cost the same as incandescent bulbs and, thus, will help to save money. However, there are some questions that need to be answered in order to evaluate the efficiency of such proposal.
First of all, does LEDs consume less electricity than incandescent bulbs? The fact that LEDs burn brighter doesn't imply that they are energy saving. Higher electricity consuming might be the reason for their brightness, hence, proposal will not only be inefficient, but will increase city's expenses. However, it might be the case that LEDs consume less, then there are more questions to be answered. Are public buildings consuming the most electrical energy in the city or it may be other public places such as subway or parks with streetlights? In the case when other public places consume more than buildings, policy will not work to decrease spendings. Another question: what about private sector? Is it consuming less than public one? If the answer is positive, then such proposal might be efficacious. But if private sector on the general consume more electricity, changing bulbs in public buildings, will slightly affect overall consumption. In this case, another policy for spending reducing should be considered.
From all the above, we can see that even though the argument presents a possible solution for the electricity saving, it is contingent upon many patterns of energy consumption in the city that should be taken into consideration. First, at a basic level, we should determine whether LEDs do require less energy. Second, analyze if public buildings are the main consumers. These steps might not lead exactly to the best solution of the city electrical consumption management, but would at least help to evaluate the council's proposal.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
flaws:
for GRE argument essays, minimum three arguments wanted.
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 325 350
No. of Characters: 1644 1500
No. of Different Words: 163 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.246 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.058 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.617 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 120 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 87 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 70 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.105 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.162 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.579 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.306 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.431 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.076 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 3 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 34, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'councils'' or 'council's'?
Suggestion: councils'; council's
According to the editorial, city councils proposal considers one possible solutio...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 108, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...bulbs? The fact that LEDs burn brighter doesnt imply that they are energy saving. High...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 515, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'councils'' or 'council's'?
Suggestion: councils'; council's
...but would at least help to evaluate the councils proposal.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, if, may, second, so, then, thus, at least, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 55.5748502994 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1694.0 2260.96107784 75% => OK
No of words: 324.0 441.139720559 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.22839506173 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24264068712 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72808779902 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 204.123752495 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.537037037037 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 519.3 705.55239521 74% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 2.0 8.76447105788 23% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 52.4406778308 57.8364921388 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.1111111111 119.503703932 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0 23.324526521 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.11111111111 5.70786347227 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 5.15768463074 58% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 6.88822355289 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.26586445371 0.218282227539 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0818822200973 0.0743258471296 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0560194654768 0.0701772020484 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180376974043 0.128457276422 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0242710257347 0.0628817314937 39% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.3799401198 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.28 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 98.500998004 78% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.