Writing task 1: The chart below shows the percentages of different types of household waste that were recycled in one city between 1992 and 2002.
The bar chart compares four different kinds of household waste which were recycled in a particular city during 10 years, from 1992 to 2002.
Overall, there was a growing amount of household waste recycled on all types in 10 years, with the exception for cans in 1997. The majority of recycling came from glass and paper, whereas plastic was recycled the least.
The percentage of glass which was recycled in 1992 was about 14%, then it increased by a half at about 28% in 1997. Over the next 5 years, the figure for glass went up dramatically to approximately 49%, making glass the most recycled waste material. In a similar pattern, the proportion of paper witnessed a significant rise from about 14% in 1992 to 32% and 39% in 1997 and 2002 respectively.
Regarding cans, the figure started at 19%, the highest type of household waste which was recycled in 1992. It then declined steadily to 12% in 1997 before going up to 25% in 2002. In a meantime, the proportion of plastic was at 11% in 1992 then it plateaued at around 13% in 5 years from 1997 to 2002.
(191 words)
Comments
The rendered bar graph…
The rendered bar graph depicts the information about three different household waste that how much of these were being recycled in an urban area in the given time frame.
Turning to the details, conspicuous from the graph, re-use of plastic waste had shown almost similar proportion in a decade which was around 10 to 12%. Similarly, remaking from used cans was increased with fluctuation, the percentum was around 13%, 10% and 21% in the years of 1992, 1997 and 2002 respectively.
Shifting towards the paper and glass, In 1992 both had same amount which were reprocessed after use but quantity of these items were significantly increase and doubled in 2002 as compare to the previous last 5 years that was reached approximately 50% in case of glass and roughly 39% of papers.
Overall, the recycling process of paper and glass ware simultaneously increase with time as against as the cans and plastic.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The bar chart compares four different ki...
^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ty during 10 years, from 1992 to 2002. Overall, there was a growing amount of h...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hereas plastic was recycled the least. The percentage of glass which was recycl...
^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...and 39% in 1997 and 2002 respectively. Regarding cans, the figure started at 19...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 307, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...round 13% in 5 years from 1997 to 2002. 191 words
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, regarding, then, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 33.7804878049 142% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 883.0 965.302439024 91% => OK
No of words: 193.0 196.424390244 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.57512953368 4.92477711251 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.72725689877 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55929179578 2.65546596893 96% => OK
Unique words: 102.0 106.607317073 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.528497409326 0.547539520022 97% => OK
syllable_count: 243.9 283.868780488 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.33902439024 184% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.2784534693 43.030603864 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.1111111111 112.824112599 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4444444444 22.9334400587 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.11111111111 5.23603664747 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 1.69756097561 295% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 1.13902439024 351% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.259632444552 0.215688989381 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.106337491073 0.103423049105 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0922349683273 0.0843802449381 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.187475263363 0.15604864568 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0875003353638 0.0819641961636 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.2329268293 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 75.54 61.2550243902 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 10.3012195122 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.28 11.4140731707 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.3 8.06136585366 91% => OK
difficult_words: 32.0 40.7170731707 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => 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.