First of all, the reading claims that new regulations are unnecessary. Existing rules are very much effective. Companies use liners to prevent coal ash to seep into the ground when coal ash is disposed off in ponds or landfills. However, the lecture dismisses the claim by pointing out, use of liners is not sufficient to prevent damage to the environment. Along with that, companies use liners for new disposal sites not for older sites. There are few occurrences of drinking water getting contaminated due to coal ash. Strict rules are required for new as well as old sites.
Next, the reading passage makes the argument that, stricter rules may discourage companies to recycle coal ash more, also the consumers who use recycled coal ash products. The lecture counters this point by using example of Mercury- hazardous chemical substance. Strict rules are in effect for last fifty years regarding Mercury; despite of that consumers use and recycle it successfully.
Lastly, the reading argues that the disposal and handling cost of coal ash will increase significantly for power plant companies and the direct impact will be on the public with higher bill amount. The lecture refutes this point by stating the increase in the cost will be worth and it for greater purpose. Moreover, the professor adds, the customers will experience one percent increase in their bills and it is not a lot of price to pay to protect our environment.
In conclusion, the lecture disagrees with the reading article and underlines the need for stricter regulations to protect our environment from any harm due to coal ash.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 167, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...es and the direct impact will be on the general public with higher bill amount. The lecture re...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, lastly, may, moreover, regarding, so, well, in conclusion, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1357.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 267.0 270.72406181 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08239700375 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04229324003 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64628939539 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 145.348785872 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550561797753 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 416.7 419.366225166 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => 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: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.7531511543 49.2860985944 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.9285714286 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0714285714 21.698381199 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.78571428571 7.06452816374 110% => 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 : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.523337928802 0.272083759551 192% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.164420013222 0.0996497079465 165% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.106118208458 0.0662205650399 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.300000244064 0.162205337803 185% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0795582074571 0.0443174109184 180% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.3589403974 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.66 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 20.0 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.