Stricter rules on handling coal ash or not
The reading and the lecture are both about the likely efficiency of the stricter laws imposed on handling and storing coal ash due to it's harmful damages to the environment. Actually, the author provides three reasons about why some companies do not agree with these stricter regulations. On the other hand, the professor is not convinced of this and cast doubts on each of the reasons presented in the reading. Point the other side of story, she is of the opinion that we do need tough laws on handling and storing this material.
To begin with, the author argues that there exists environmental laws already. Based on these laws, companies are forced to use liner which is a material that stop coal ash from penetrating and contaminating the soil, in every new landfill or pond they produce. This specific argument is challenged by the professor. According to her, these rules are not sufficient enough. Furthermore, she states that this liner is merely used for new land and ponds, however it should be utilized for all new and old sites. Moreover, the professor concerns that the old ones can leak to the drinking and and give rise to devastating hazards.
Secondly, the writer disputes that harder rules may have adverse effect on consumers' viewpoint through products yielded from recycling coal ash and dissuade them from buying them. The lecturer, on the other hand, opposes this notion by asserting that it is a wrong assumption of tough rules. Moreover, she provides a compelling example of mercury recycling to endorse her perspective. There are strict rules on storing and handling mercury which has resulted in successful and safe recycling during 50 years, without any concerns for buying the products.
Finally, the author averts that these new regulations yield results in extra cost for power companies which force them to rise the price of electricity. Additionally, the author averts that this phenomenon will not be favorable for costumers. In contrast, the lecturer's stance is that although it may cause extra cost, but this cost worth saving the environment certainly. Also, the professor puts forth to the idea that since merely one percent augment will be added to the costumers bill, it will not put a heavy burden on people's shoulder at all.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 588, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: and
...t the old ones can leak to the drinking and and give rise to devastating hazards. Seco...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 76, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'consumers'' or 'consumer's'?
Suggestion: consumers'; consumer's
...harder rules may have adverse effect on consumers viewpoint through products yielded from...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 261, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lecturers'' or 'lecturer's'?
Suggestion: lecturers'; lecturer's
...vorable for costumers. In contrast, the lecturers stance is that although it may cause ex...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, in contrast, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 22.412803532 165% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 47.0 30.3222958057 155% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1892.0 1373.03311258 138% => OK
No of words: 378.0 270.72406181 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.00529100529 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40933352052 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60237867989 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 145.348785872 144% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.55291005291 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 575.1 419.366225166 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.9201363218 49.2860985944 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.111111111 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 21.698381199 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.66666666667 7.06452816374 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 4.45695364238 269% => Less 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: 0.198184601495 0.272083759551 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.050407691832 0.0996497079465 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0778364095681 0.0662205650399 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.114451208805 0.162205337803 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0792593442333 0.0443174109184 179% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.3589403974 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.86 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 63.6247240618 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.