This set of material focuses on the debate over setting stricter regulations for handling and storing coal ash. The author has negative attitude toward the regulations and supports the idea by three possible reasons. While, the speaker casts doubt on them and says definitely setting stricter regulations is needed to decrease the negative consequences of coal ash. She provides strong reasons to clarify her idea .
First, the author claims that sort of regulations already exist. However, the professor states that the existed ones are not sufficient. She describes it more by adding that the regulations make companies to use liner for their new landfill and new ponds. But we should know that the companies do not need any new landill and ponds. We should be aware that the polluted leakage from the old landfills will pollute undergroundwater. So, stricter regulations must be set to include both old and new ponds and landfills.
Second, the essay holds that the regulation will discourage companies which recylce coal ash to other products. Conversely, the lecturer argues that it will not necessarily discourage them. To explain the idea more, she exemplifies Mercury as one of the most harmful products. Recycilg regulations in the case of Mercury did not horrify people to change to another product and for years they have been recycling mercury safely and successfully. Therefore, they will not be afraid of the harms of the coal ash, too.
Third, the writer demonstrates that setting stricter rules will increase costs. The professor admits the point of view by saying that it is true that it will increase the costs, however, she believes that the increase is well worth to costs. The regulation will save around 15 billion dollars in the industry. Also the price of electericity will increase around 1 percent per household which is not too much.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 414, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...vides strong reasons to clarify her idea . First, the author claims that sort...
^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... strong reasons to clarify her idea . First, the author claims that sort of re...
^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...both old and new ponds and landfills. Second, the essay holds that the regulat...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...id of the harms of the coal ash, too. Third, the writer demonstrates that sett...
^^^
Line 4, column 314, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...und 15 billion dollars in the industry. Also the price of electericity will increase...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, first, however, if, second, so, therefore, third, well, while, sort of, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1560.0 1373.03311258 114% => OK
No of words: 305.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11475409836 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17902490978 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69253282407 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56393442623 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 470.7 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.1699090314 49.2860985944 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.1052631579 110.228320801 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.0526315789 21.698381199 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.52631578947 7.06452816374 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.366954553353 0.272083759551 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104867170403 0.0996497079465 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0883625786381 0.0662205650399 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.204043727948 0.162205337803 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0726482209634 0.0443174109184 164% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 13.3589403974 80% => 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: 12.06 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.31 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 63.6247240618 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.