The graph below shows electricity production (in terawatt hours) in France between 1980 and 2010
The line chart gives data about the amount of electricity generation in France from 1980 to 2010.
Overall as can be seen from the diagram, while there was a grow in electricity production from nuclear and renewable, the opposite was true for thermal and hydroelectric. In addition, nuclear had the most popular energy source for produce electric.
In 1980 the figures for electricity production from nuclear was a 50 TW-h. After that, the amount experienced a significant increase before reaching a peak of around 460 TW-h in 2005 and finally slightly declined to about 430 TW-h in 2010. similarly, starting at 0 TW-h in 1980, the figures for produce electric from renewable remain unchanged until 2005 but later marginally went to about 30 TW-H in 2010. In addition, while electricity generation from nuclear strong rise, the opposite was true for renewable.
Over the same period, the figures for produce electric from thermal to around 120 TW-h in 1980 before dropping sharply to 50 TW-h in 1990 and finally remain stable until 2010. similarly, beginning at about 70 TW-h in 1980, the electronic produced from hydroelectric saw fluctuation before sightly falling to 50 TW-h in 2005 and finally remain unchanged until 2010. Furthermore, the amount of electricity generation from hydroelectric and thermal from 2005 to 2010 was unchanged to 50 TW-h.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eration in France from 1980 to 2010. Overall as can be seen from the diagram,...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 63, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... seen from the diagram, while there was a grow in electricity production from nuclear ...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... energy source for produce electric. In 1980 the figures for electricity prod...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 246, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Similarly
...tly declined to about 430 TW-h in 2010. similarly, starting at 0 TW-h in 1980, the figure...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...the opposite was true for renewable. Over the same period, the figures for pr...
^^^^
Line 7, column 181, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Similarly
...0 and finally remain stable until 2010. similarly, beginning at about 70 TW-h in 1980, th...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, furthermore, if, similarly, so, while, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 1.0 5.60731707317 18% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 33.7804878049 154% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 3.97073170732 201% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1147.0 965.302439024 119% => OK
No of words: 220.0 196.424390244 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21363636364 4.92477711251 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.85128510684 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80355072974 2.65546596893 106% => OK
Unique words: 100.0 106.607317073 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.454545454545 0.547539520022 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 326.7 283.868780488 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.33902439024 184% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.2733570236 43.030603864 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.7 112.824112599 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 22.9334400587 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.4 5.23603664747 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 1.69756097561 353% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.152691926961 0.215688989381 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0875800876685 0.103423049105 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0601293510042 0.0843802449381 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125041166318 0.15604864568 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0578528214829 0.0819641961636 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.2329268293 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 61.2550243902 94% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.3012195122 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 11.4140731707 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.74 8.06136585366 96% => OK
difficult_words: 42.0 40.7170731707 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.4329268293 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.