The article and the lecture are both about going green. According to the reading, going green is not only beneficial for environment but also for an individual. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. He thinks that it is hard for an individual to go green with out support of multiple people.
According to the reading, going green is beneficial for environment. The author mentions that pollution is reduced by minimizing the amount of waste. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that people prefer cheap products rather than costly ones. Additionally, he points out that coffee shop sells coffee in cheap cup material for higher profits.
Secondly, the author suggests that companies get more profits by going green. The article notes that going green earns trust of customers as a result, increasing the profits of a company. The lecturer rebuts this argument. He suggests that companies make cheaper products for higher profits. He elaborates on this by mentioning that the customers of any company shows interest in cheaper products rather than costly products.
Finally, the author posits that people can save money by going green. He contents that going green can reduce costs of many things used in our daily life. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that people would spend for installation of equipment rather than save money for further. She put forth the idea of how installation of solar panels increases the costs.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 278, Rule ID: WITH_OUT[1]
Message: This word is usually written together. Did you mean 'without'?
Suggestion: without
...t is hard for an individual to go green with out support of multiple people. Accordin...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, if, second, secondly, so, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1246.0 1373.03311258 91% => OK
No of words: 244.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.10655737705 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95227774224 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54403571325 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 132.0 145.348785872 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.540983606557 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 365.4 419.366225166 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 25.3856671917 49.2860985944 52% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 69.2222222222 110.228320801 63% => OK
Words per sentence: 13.5555555556 21.698381199 62% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.22222222222 7.06452816374 60% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.280345915422 0.272083759551 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10829924305 0.0996497079465 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.1240979544 0.0662205650399 187% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.189407897307 0.162205337803 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0723644201297 0.0443174109184 163% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.4 13.3589403974 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.74 53.8541721854 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 11.0289183223 65% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.77 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.97 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.