The bar chart depicts various ways of disposing of waste products in four cities (Tronoto, Madrid, Amman and Kuala Lampur).
Overall, landfill appears to be the most popular method of getting rid of waste in Toronto and Amman. In other two cities i.e. Madrid and Kuala Lampur, however, most of the rubbish is discarded by incineration. Other potential ways are recycling and compositing but a glimpse on chart shows they are less likely to be used.
Both Toronto and Amman have landfilling as dominant waste disposal strategy with 75% and 50% of litter being discarded by this process respectively. On the other hand, in terms of other methods Toronto only incinerates 10% of rubbish while Amman uses it for 40% amount. Recycling accounts for 10% of product disposal in Amman but for Toronto it is lesser standing at nearly 8%. Similarly, compositing is also used for 8% waste whilst in Amman it is hardly 2% of the total waste management.
More than half of the litter disposed by Kaula Lampur is done by incineration in contrast to Madrid where despite being most popular method only 40% of useless products are incinerated. The second most frequent technique in Madrid is landfilling whilst in Kuala Lampur it is recycling. Interestingly though, the amount of recycled products is similar in both cities with nearly quarter of their waste being regenerated. In similarity to other cities, these two also use compositing for discarding less than 10% of their waste.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, second, similarly, so, while, in contrast, in contrast to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 7.0 229% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 10.0 5.60731707317 178% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 40.0 33.7804878049 118% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1224.0 965.302439024 127% => OK
No of words: 245.0 196.424390244 125% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99591836735 4.92477711251 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95632099841 3.73543355544 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68084665274 2.65546596893 101% => OK
Unique words: 129.0 106.607317073 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.526530612245 0.547539520022 96% => OK
syllable_count: 381.6 283.868780488 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 8.94146341463 134% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 23.4963058562 43.030603864 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 102.0 112.824112599 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4166666667 22.9334400587 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 5.23603664747 153% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 1.13902439024 615% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.327323673087 0.215688989381 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124269637459 0.103423049105 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0878424474913 0.0843802449381 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.231893072993 0.15604864568 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0946212832674 0.0819641961636 115% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.2329268293 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 61.2550243902 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.72 11.4140731707 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.06136585366 109% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 40.7170731707 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => 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.