The reading states that new regulations on caol ash are unnecessary and might have negative results, and provides some reasons of support. The professor, however, explains that strict regulations are necessery and refutes each of author's reasons.
First, the reading claims that effective environmental regulations already exist.The professor refutes this point by stating that current regulations are not sufficient. She mentions that there are some regulations now such as using liner, yet it is not adequate. Besides, she says that current regulations are useful for new land. But she adds the point that old land has a significant danger on environment. For example, she mentions that some of caol ash may leak into ground water. Therefore, the lecturer concludes that we need some strict regulations that prevent environment damaging not only for old one but also for new one.
Second, the reading states that strict rules might discourage the recycling of coal ash into other products. On the other hand, the professor refutes this point by providing an example of strict rule which was successful. He mentions that there have been some long strict rule about marcary which was successful.
Third, the reading claims that strict new regulations would result in a significant increase in costs. The professor rebuts this idea by saying that it does not. She says that government may spend some money about 15 billions on power but he mensions that it would increase electrocity's bill by one percent.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 81, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...environmental regulations already exist.The professor refutes this point by stating...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, however, if, may, second, so, therefore, third, for example, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 19.0 30.3222958057 63% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1266.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 242.0 270.72406181 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.23140495868 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94415379849 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68425884433 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 129.0 145.348785872 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.53305785124 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 380.7 419.366225166 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.9629888005 49.2860985944 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.4285714286 110.228320801 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2857142857 21.698381199 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.14285714286 7.06452816374 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => 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: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.337462096227 0.272083759551 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.118581653022 0.0996497079465 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0761076359287 0.0662205650399 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.190485228941 0.162205337803 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0406706128063 0.0443174109184 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.76 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.94 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.