The bar chart details the amount of waste that was disposed via landfill, burning and dumping at sea, in
a particular European country between 2005 and 2008.
The given chart illustrates the information about three different method of waste disposal in a specific European country over a four years period from 2005 to 2008. An overall view indicates that landfill was the first option for waste disposal, however, in 2008, it was the burning that used for disposal extensively.
In 2005, around 1800 million tons of waste were disposed by landfilling. The amount of waste which was disposed via dumping at sea was 600 million tons, while only about 500 million tons of rubbish has been burnt. In the next year, the great amount of ?? has removed by landfilling, 1200 million tones. But the figure of rubbish which disposed by two other methods was the same (600 million tons).
The amount of rubbish that dispose by landfilling has declined to around 900 and 600 tones in 2007 and 2008, respectively. On the other hand, the usage of burning method as a disposal method has increased over two last years. As it can be seen, in 2008, 900 million tones of waste have been disposed by burning which is roughly twice more than the figure of 2005.
It is noteworthy to say that Dumping at sea showed a stable trend over mentioned years, although it experienced a slight reduction in 2008.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 252, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t. In the next year, the great amount of ?? has removed by landfilling, 1200 mill...
^^
Line 5, column 257, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Has
... the next year, the great amount of ?? has removed by landfilling, 1200 million to...
^^^
Line 9, column 77, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...y landfilling has declined to around 900 and 600 tones in 2007 and 2008, respecti...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 7.0 157% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1024.0 965.302439024 106% => OK
No of words: 213.0 196.424390244 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.80751173709 4.92477711251 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82027741392 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45602426725 2.65546596893 92% => OK
Unique words: 117.0 106.607317073 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.549295774648 0.547539520022 100% => OK
syllable_count: 291.6 283.868780488 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 8.94146341463 123% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.5360771871 43.030603864 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.0909090909 112.824112599 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3636363636 22.9334400587 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.45454545455 5.23603664747 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 1.13902439024 527% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.341535859359 0.215688989381 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.12184569709 0.103423049105 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0691519666052 0.0843802449381 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.195003732943 0.15604864568 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.05141551066 0.0819641961636 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.2329268293 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 61.2550243902 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 10.3012195122 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.62 11.4140731707 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.32 8.06136585366 91% => OK
difficult_words: 37.0 40.7170731707 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.