The pie charts below show how dangerous waste products are dealt with in three countries.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparison where relevant.

Essay topics:

The pie charts below show how dangerous waste products are dealt with in three countries.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparison where relevant.

The pie charts compare toxic waste materials destroying by five different methods in three countries namely in Republic of Korea, Sweden, and the UK.
It is clear that Sweden and the UK destroys waste products mostly by creating land fills. It is also noticeable that recycling is the most common method in Republic of Korea to vanish dangerous waste materials.
Looking at the information in more detail, we can see that the UK destroying the most of the waste products which are dangerous by underground method, at 82%, while the percentage of this method in Republic of Korea and Sweden equal to 22% and 55% respectively. But 69% of waste products are recycling in Republic of Korea and this figure used in 25% of waste materials in Sweden, whereas it is not usable method in the UK.
It can also be seen that a way of destroying dangerous waste products by fire is not common method in the UK, at 2%, but Sweden destroys 20% of this type of products by incineration, while this figure equal to 9% in Republic of Korea. The same percentage of waste products vanishing by using in chemical treatment and dumping at sea, at 8%. However, for Sweden and Republic of Korea these methods are not an option.

Votes
Average: 6.1 (1 vote)

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 338, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ing in Republic of Korea and this figure used in 25% of waste materials in Sweden...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, so, whereas, while

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 1.00243902439 200% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 6.8 132% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 5.60731707317 250% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 40.0 33.7804878049 118% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 994.0 965.302439024 103% => OK
No of words: 213.0 196.424390244 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.66666666667 4.92477711251 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82027741392 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60476659426 2.65546596893 98% => OK
Unique words: 98.0 106.607317073 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.460093896714 0.547539520022 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 306.0 283.868780488 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 1.53170731707 261% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.482926829268 621% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.4926829268 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.185738106 43.030603864 147% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.25 112.824112599 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.625 22.9334400587 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.23603664747 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 3.70975609756 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 1.13902439024 615% => Less 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: 0.123099653618 0.215688989381 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0701404966166 0.103423049105 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0307229068655 0.0843802449381 36% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0973815516672 0.15604864568 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0125862329697 0.0819641961636 15% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.2329268293 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 62.01 61.2550243902 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.1 11.4140731707 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.74 8.06136585366 96% => OK
difficult_words: 38.0 40.7170731707 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.4329268293 114% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.9970731707 113% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => 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.