Question: Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they change the specific arguments presented in the reading passage.
making sever rules for recycling of coal ash.
Actually, both the passage and the lecture comment about whether enacting legislation in order to decline the deleterious effects of coal ash is necessary or not. Although the passage brings three reasons for proving that the strict laws, which not only contributes the environment to be safe but it also influence negatively are unfounded, the lecturer puts those hypothesizes under question. According to the lecture, none of the factors are convincing.
First, as the passage mentioned, some rules are already used un companies in order to decrease the danger of ash; nonetheless, the speaker doesn't reinforce the claim by adding the obvious fact that the adopted laws aren't sufficient because line-special material just is utilized in new companies; hence, companies have to have some others rules in order to lead environment to meet its need.
Next, as the passage declared, companies might lose their consumer when buyers will be aware of such laws. The professor; however, refutes the idea by exemplifying another rule which has been passed for mercury.
Finally, the article indicates that cost will be considerably increased by new regulations; nevertheless, as the lecturer stated, albeit we will encounter cost raising, the percentage of increase is so rational that people, especially environmentalist, completely agree with it.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 140, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...danger of ash; nonetheless, the speaker doesnt reinforce the claim by adding the obvio...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 216, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
... the obvious fact that the adopted laws arent sufficient because line-special materia...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, hence, however, if, nevertheless, nonetheless, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 22.412803532 45% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1149.0 1373.03311258 84% => OK
No of words: 208.0 270.72406181 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.52403846154 5.08290768461 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.79765784423 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95575343447 2.5805825403 115% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.692307692308 0.540411800872 128% => OK
syllable_count: 359.1 419.366225166 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 13.0662251656 54% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 29.0 21.2450331126 137% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 107.982424874 49.2860985944 219% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 164.142857143 110.228320801 149% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.7142857143 21.698381199 137% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.2857142857 7.06452816374 174% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.103801246416 0.272083759551 38% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0467009705999 0.0996497079465 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0169792095829 0.0662205650399 26% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0562163053767 0.162205337803 35% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.029251354076 0.0443174109184 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.4 13.3589403974 145% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.58 53.8541721854 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 11.0289183223 143% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.33 12.2367328918 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.31 8.42419426049 122% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.498013245 130% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.2008830022 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.