As is illustrated by these two figures, while a line graph statistically denotes the universal water consumption in a 100 -year period in three divergent areas including Agriculture, industrial as well as domestic use, the table clearly delineates water use per person particularly in two various nations in size of their lands and the number of population.
Looking from an overall perspective, it is remarkably apparent from the information supplied by the first graph that through these years, the amount of water that has consumed for agriculture section, has witnessed a substantial growth among other water-consuming areas. It is also evident to note that, Brazilian's water consumption per person is far higher than the people who live in Congo relying on the table's data.
As can be seen from the line graph, Despite the fact that the consumption of water in all these three areas has increased within 100 years, some areas namely farming activities along with industrial use in company both have seen a sharp increment from almost 500 km3 to almost 3000km3 as well as 0 km3 to almost close to 1000km3 respectively. On the contrary the amount of water, which is consumed in domestic use section, has guarded its self against remarkable conversions, that it has remained almost stable.
Turning to the second graph, considering the population of both Brazil besides Congo that is 176 and 5.2 million respectively, it is understandably reasonable that, the water consumption per person of Brazil is almost 4 and a half times more than Congo. It is also valuable to put a light on varying size of irrigated land area of these two nations that is 26.500 and 100 km2 in Brazil and Congo respectively, thus it is not unpredictable why Brazil's water consumption calculated 359m3 for each person, nonetheless, Congo has only consumed 8m3 water.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... lands and the number of population. Looking from an overall perspective, it ...
^^
Line 3, column 410, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'tables'' or 'table's'?
Suggestion: tables'; table's
...people who live in Congo relying on the tables data. As can be seen from the line g...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 286, Rule ID: BOTH_AS_WELL_AS[1]
Message: Probable usage error. Use 'and' after 'both'.
Suggestion: and
...t from almost 500 km3 to almost 3000km3 as well as 0 km3 to almost close to 1000km3 respec...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 227, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'half' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'halves'.
Suggestion: halves
... per person of Brazil is almost 4 and a half times more than Congo. It is also valua...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, first, look, nonetheless, second, so, thus, well, while, as well as, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 7.0 171% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 3.15609756098 317% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 20.0 5.60731707317 357% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 33.7804878049 121% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 3.97073170732 277% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1550.0 965.302439024 161% => OK
No of words: 305.0 196.424390244 155% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.08196721311 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17902490978 3.73543355544 112% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93347177444 2.65546596893 110% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 106.607317073 158% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550819672131 0.547539520022 101% => OK
syllable_count: 470.7 283.868780488 166% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 1.53170731707 326% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 43.0 22.4926829268 191% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 74.2178261221 43.030603864 172% => OK
Chars per sentence: 221.428571429 112.824112599 196% => OK
Words per sentence: 43.5714285714 22.9334400587 190% => OK
Discourse Markers: 14.1428571429 5.23603664747 270% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 1.69756097561 236% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.09268292683 24% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.251119962713 0.215688989381 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.12631541994 0.103423049105 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.047369657298 0.0843802449381 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.166411166185 0.15604864568 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0465308359372 0.0819641961636 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 24.3 13.2329268293 184% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.29 61.2550243902 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.51609756098 200% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 18.9 10.3012195122 183% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.07 11.4140731707 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.5 8.06136585366 118% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 40.7170731707 177% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.5 11.4329268293 179% => OK
gunning_fog: 19.2 10.9970731707 175% => OK
text_standard: 19.0 11.0658536585 172% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.