A vice president of a large and highly diversified company stated in his memo that, based on the low building's expenses for last year maintenance of Zeta rather than Alpha and Also low energy consumption of Zeta buildings every year since its construction, they have come to the conclusion that to use Zeta for their new building project, even though Alpha's bid promises lower construction costs. However, two questions must be answered before this recommendation can be appropriately evaluated.
First of all, are the Zeta building's expenses for maintenance lower every year? in other words, are the annual amount of needed work for the maintenance of two buildings roughly comparable? The repairs for each building may be different each year, which means the last year's low cost of the Zeta building may be because higher expenses have been done two years ago. Perhaps the maintenance needed of Zeta in the previous year was some minor checkups, and the major pairs have been done for more than one year or should have been done in about more than one year. Therefore, it is possible that in those years, the maintenance expenses for the Alpha building were much lower than Zeta's or became much lower for this year. If the above is true, the argument does not hold the water.
Secondly, are the whole situation of using these two buildings precisely similar? The energy consumption of a building is a matter of fact that highly depends on the building situation. For instance, the number of people using that building is a critical factor in measuring energy usage. The number of employees who work on the Alpha buildings may be significantly more than the counterpart building's employees. It is even possible that the energy consumption ratio got even adverse in a similar situation in the number of employees in both buildings. Another critical factor in the energy consumption of a building is where the building is located. Therefore, there is a possibility that the Zeta building is situated in a place much colder or hotter than Alpha's location. As a result, the Zeta building in summer needs more energy for cooling systems and more for warming systems in winter. If either of these scenarios has merit, then the conclusion drawn in the original argument is weakened.
To wrap it up, the argument, as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. Suppose the author can answer the two questions mentioned above and offer more evidence (perhaps in a systematic research study). In that case, it will be possible to fully evaluate the viability of the proposed recommendation to use Zeta rather than Alpha for the new building project.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 451 350
No. of Characters: 2202 1500
No. of Different Words: 205 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.608 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.882 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.676 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 152 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 113 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 90 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.737 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.004 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.632 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.333 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.51 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.098 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 81, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: In
...enses for maintenance lower every year? in other words, are the annual amount of n...
^^
Line 6, column 200, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...on the building situation. For instance, the number of people using that building...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, for instance, as a result, first of all, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2249.0 2260.96107784 99% => OK
No of words: 451.0 441.139720559 102% => OK
Chars per words: 4.9866962306 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60833598836 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7258770968 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 204.123752495 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.458980044346 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 709.2 705.55239521 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 68.3588143548 57.8364921388 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.45 119.503703932 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.55 23.324526521 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 5.70786347227 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.258810243222 0.218282227539 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0834449839317 0.0743258471296 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0621885616438 0.0701772020484 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165620908401 0.128457276422 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0598317787503 0.0628817314937 95% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.