TPO 41: integrated writhing task
The remaining ashes from burning coals have some chemical materials which are hazardous for the environment. Environmentalists propose that government set rules for handling and storing the ashes. The reading is about companies' view toward why setting up new rules about this issue is not crucial, besides, they might have negative consequences. However, the lecturer claims this issue is serious and requires strict rules.
First of all, the author mentions companies' view about current regulations. For instance, one of the most effective ones is using liners which prevent leakage of chemicals to the environment and contamination of the soil and water. On the other hand, the lecturer states that current regulations are not sufficient and for the case of using liners, they are used just in new sites, however, in older sites the leakage of chemicals has led to contamination of drink water.
Secondly, the author explains companies' concern about the potential negative effects of setting up strict rules. Currently, the coal ashes are recycled and converted into some products like concrete and bricks. Stricter regulations may change the customers' mindset about these products. They may think these products are dangerous and stop buying them. The lecturer, on the contrary, rebut this notion by giving the example of mercury which is a hazardous substance and there are lots of strict regulation about handling it but it has been recycled over 50 years and people have not stopped using the recycled materials.
Finally, the author states that companies believe strict new regulations would impose extra great costs on power companies which would lead to an increase in the price of electricity. The lecturer, however, disaccords with this notion. She mentions that according to analysts new costs will be well worth the extra costs of power companies which is about 50 billion dollars and it would increase the electricity bills by about 1% which is not significant.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 248, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'customers'' or 'customer's'?
Suggestion: customers'; customer's
...ks. Stricter regulations may change the customers mindset about these products. They may ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 554, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...andling it but it has been recycled over 50 years and people have not stopped usi...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, well, for instance, first of all, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 30.3222958057 132% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1667.0 1373.03311258 121% => OK
No of words: 315.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29206349206 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69339589669 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 145.348785872 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.530158730159 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 505.8 419.366225166 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
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: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.1662552464 49.2860985944 134% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.133333333 110.228320801 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 21.698381199 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.2 7.06452816374 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.445261358565 0.272083759551 164% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.132044138144 0.0996497079465 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0798704007239 0.0662205650399 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.241623442602 0.162205337803 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0387144264913 0.0443174109184 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.3589403974 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.4 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 63.6247240618 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.