Environmental concern of coal ash
The reading and the lecture are both about an environmental concern of coal ash. The author of
reading believes that the power companies' representatives are of the opinion that there is no
need for further regulation; however, the speaker effectively casts doubt on each and every
arguments presented by those. She believes that current roles are not sufficient.
To begin with, the penman cites the fact that representatives believe that current regulations are
enough, highlighting the use of liner as a mean for preventing contamination. However, the
speaker diverges from this viewpoint by addressing the limited use of liner. She further discusses
that the use of liner is limited to old sites, whereas they should be used in both old and new cites
to prevent ground water contamination.
Secondly, The author mentions the idea that the people use of recycled materials from coal ashes
will decline due to the fact that they become more alert to possible heath threats. On the contrary,
the speaker cites a similar situation with mercury as an example. She argues that despite the fact
that mercury was known to have hazardous effect, people continue to use those safely-recycled
products of mercury over the course of last 50 years. In light of this evidence, the author's
argument begin to lose weight.
Finally, the essayist suggests that there will be an increase in cost because of regulations since
the companies should spend money in disposal and handling of coal ash. On the other hand,
never would the orator accept this as an viable argument since she believes that is a small price
to pay to have a cleaner environment. To be more specific, she argues that studies have shown
that the implementation of regulations can cost 50 billion dollars for companies, which can be
compensated by 1 percent increase in electricity bills of an individual. She further mentions that
this is an acceptable trade-off.
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 16, column 86, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...0 years. In light of this evidence, the authors argument begin to lose weight. Fina...
^^^^^^^
Line 21, column 39, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
... never would the orator accept this as an viable argument since she believes that...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, however, if, second, secondly, whereas, on the contrary, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 30.3222958057 152% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1648.0 1373.03311258 120% => OK
No of words: 317.0 270.72406181 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19873817035 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21953715646 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85643160335 2.5805825403 111% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520504731861 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 500.4 419.366225166 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.2369894497 49.2860985944 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.714285714 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6428571429 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06452816374 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 22.0 4.09492273731 537% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => 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: 0.14742986485 0.272083759551 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0617461856701 0.0996497079465 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.13987599867 0.0662205650399 211% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0433892593122 0.162205337803 27% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.114430056789 0.0443174109184 258% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 16, column 86, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...0 years. In light of this evidence, the authors argument begin to lose weight. Fina...
^^^^^^^
Line 21, column 39, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
... never would the orator accept this as an viable argument since she believes that...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, however, if, second, secondly, whereas, on the contrary, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 30.3222958057 152% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1648.0 1373.03311258 120% => OK
No of words: 317.0 270.72406181 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19873817035 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21953715646 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85643160335 2.5805825403 111% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520504731861 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 500.4 419.366225166 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.2369894497 49.2860985944 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.714285714 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6428571429 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06452816374 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 22.0 4.09492273731 537% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => 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: 0.14742986485 0.272083759551 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0617461856701 0.0996497079465 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.13987599867 0.0662205650399 211% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0433892593122 0.162205337803 27% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.114430056789 0.0443174109184 258% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.