The reading and lecture both discuss the need of having a strong regulations to hand the the coal ash materials. While the reading provides three explanations to support that we do not need any further regulations, the professor refutes, saying none of these claims are convincing.
Firstly, the reading avers that we already have enough environmental regulations. For instance, all companies have to use liner to stop any coal ask leaking. However, the professor argues this notion by saying that using the liner by companies is not sufficient. Moreover, the liner has to be added to any land full . This is because several old liner cost damage. For example, the chemical leaked to the ground water and the drinking water had been contaminated. So, we need strong new regulations like the old one.
Secondly, the article mentions that the strong rules might stop many companies from recycling the coal ash. In addition, consumer will thought that these materials are harmful and they will stop buying them. On the other hand, the professor questions this idea by saying that the new regulations will not stop the consumers to use the recycling products. For instance, mercury is a hazard materials and over fifty years people saved the recycling materials and there is no concern. So, people will not stop buying the recycle materials.
Lastly, the reading states that the new regulations will increase the cost of handling these hazard products. So, the cost of electricity will increase for the whole community. Nevertheless, the professor contradicts this idea by explaining that the cost of handling the coal ash will not increased. Furthermore, the analystis said that the cost of that the company pay is like one billion dollar and we can do the math. This is because the monthly electricity bill will increase just one percent which is not too much. So, it is not going to be a big deal and in the same time we can protect the environment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 66, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'regulation'?
Suggestion: regulation
...oth discuss the need of having a strong regulations to hand the the coal ash materials. Whi...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 86, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
... of having a strong regulations to hand the the coal ash materials. While the reading p...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 86, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
... of having a strong regulations to hand the the coal ash materials. While the reading p...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 317, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...e liner has to be added to any land full . This is because several old liner cost ...
^^
Line 5, column 136, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'think'
Suggestion: think
...he coal ash. In addition, consumer will thought that these materials are harmful and th...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 290, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'increase'
Suggestion: increase
... cost of handling the coal ash will not increased. Furthermore, the analystis said that t...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 593, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...deal and in the same time we can protect the environment.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, lastly, moreover, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, while, as to, for example, for instance, in addition, 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: 14.0 5.04856512141 277% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1629.0 1373.03311258 119% => OK
No of words: 328.0 270.72406181 121% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96646341463 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25567506705 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67466841468 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.484756097561 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 489.6 419.366225166 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.6437592583 49.2860985944 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 81.45 110.228320801 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.4 21.698381199 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.35 7.06452816374 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 4.33554083885 277% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
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: 0.319962063369 0.272083759551 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0955233439297 0.0996497079465 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0677575454969 0.0662205650399 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1911314804 0.162205337803 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.041048060676 0.0443174109184 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.2 13.3589403974 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 53.8541721854 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.25 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.56 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.