In this set of material, the reading passage suggests three arguments against the new regulations that the United States government should to in order to solve the problem of coal ash. However, the lectures finds all the idea dubious and skeptical and provides some evidence to refute them all.
First of all, the reading passage claims that the regulations that supposed to occur is already exists as, the companies that dispose coal ash in disposal ponds or landfills should use this linear in every new pond or landfill. On the contrary, the professor refutes this by explaining that the linear is not sufficient and used only in the necessary and that's may lead to the harmful chemicals leaked into the ground.
Furthermore, it mentioned in the reading passage that new restricted rules may discourage the recycling of the coal ash into other products. Conversely, the professor opposites this point by saying that restricted the coal ash is very necessary and will not has big effect like the mercury that has very restricted rules. Despite, it's products may be very useful.
Finally, the reading passage asserts that this issue will increase the cost as the restricted new regulations would result in a significant increase in disposal and handling costs for the power companies and it may reach to ten times of the current cost. In contrast, the professor said that the result will be very worth and the cost of electricity power needs to clean the environment reach to fifteen billion dollar and that's a huge cost.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 356, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: that's
...ient and used only in the necessary and thats may lead to the harmful chemicals leake...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 259, Rule ID: DONT_NEEDS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'have'?
Suggestion: have
...coal ash is very necessary and will not has big effect like the mercury that has ve...
^^^
Line 5, column 259, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'have'
Suggestion: have
...coal ash is very necessary and will not has big effect like the mercury that has ve...
^^^
Line 7, column 424, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: that's
...ent reach to fifteen billion dollar and thats a huge cost.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, in contrast, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => 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: 1276.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 256.0 270.72406181 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.984375 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5625 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 135.0 145.348785872 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.52734375 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 386.1 419.366225166 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => 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: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 60.0730008581 49.2860985944 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.777777778 110.228320801 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.4444444444 21.698381199 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.6666666667 7.06452816374 165% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.406523109231 0.272083759551 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.15936439927 0.0996497079465 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0962544508616 0.0662205650399 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.227557630206 0.162205337803 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0365994065057 0.0443174109184 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.3589403974 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 53.8541721854 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.0289183223 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.9 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.54 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.