The pie charts illustrate how energy was produced from fossil fuels (coal, oil, natural gas), hydro power and atomic power in Australia and France over two decades (1980 - 2000).
Overall, it is clear that over twenty years, in both countries, sources in energy production significantly changed, however, both countries had totally produced more or less the same number of units. While Australia, have not changed production of energy from fossil fuels, in contrast, France, in two decades, significantly reduced fossil fuels and mainly used atomic power.
Australia, in 1980, more than three quarters of energy had been produced from fossil fuels (80 units), while only 20 units came from water. While France, in 1980, also used fossil fuels in 70% of their total production, 15 units of total production came from atomic power, which is not seen down-under. However, only 5 units had been produced using water.
In 2000, twenty years later, energy production in both countries interestingly changed. In Australia, fossil fuels were still used the most, however, oil and natural gas from its 10 units and 20 units respectively, dropped to only 2 units each. As a reason, energy produced from coal almost tripled (130 units). Similar, however, more significant, trend was seen in France, where Nuclear power represented almost the same number of units as coal in Australia (126 units). Although, France produce the most energy from atomic power, one quarter of energy was produced from coal an oil (25 units each).
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 161, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ver, both countries had totally produced more or less the same number of units. W...
^^
Line 7, column 486, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (France) must be used with a third-person verb: 'produces'.
Suggestion: produces
...n Australia 126 units. Although, France produce the most energy from atomic power, one ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, still, while, in contrast, more or less
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 7.0 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 33.7804878049 101% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1266.0 965.302439024 131% => OK
No of words: 245.0 196.424390244 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16734693878 4.92477711251 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95632099841 3.73543355544 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48054096561 2.65546596893 93% => OK
Unique words: 127.0 106.607317073 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.518367346939 0.547539520022 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 377.1 283.868780488 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.33902439024 23% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.07073170732 374% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 8.94146341463 123% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.0402267516 43.030603864 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.090909091 112.824112599 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2727272727 22.9334400587 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.63636363636 5.23603664747 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 3.70975609756 243% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More 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: 0.227495687879 0.215688989381 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.098317271507 0.103423049105 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0604563541826 0.0843802449381 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162556070574 0.15604864568 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0466896517991 0.0819641961636 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.2329268293 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 61.2550243902 94% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.3012195122 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 11.4140731707 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.95 8.06136585366 99% => OK
difficult_words: 50.0 40.7170731707 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.4329268293 114% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => 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.