The reading and the lecture are both about creating new, much stricter regulations for handling coal ash which is a material that contains harmful chemicals for the environment. The author of the reading believes that new regulations are dispensable and might have negative consequences. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article by providing three decent reasons.
Firstly, the author points out that effective regulations already exist. For example, power plants use liner in every new pond or landfill they build in order to prevent coal ash from leaking into the soil. This point is challenged by the lecturer. She says the current regulations are not sufficient because companies use this regulation in the new pond, not in the old pond. Therefore, coal ash exists in old ponds can leak into the water ground and pollutes the drinking water. Hence, companies need much stricter regulations for all new and old ponds.
Secondly, the author contends that new stricter regulations might discourage the recycling of coal ash into other products and consumers become more concerned that recycled products are dangerous; then, stop purchasing the products. The lecturer rebuts this argument. She suggests that there are strict regulations in another area which did not bring any concern to consumers. For instance, mercury has been exposing to strict handling regulations for 15 years and people have a positive sight against it.
Finally, the author states that strict new regulations would increase the handling costs for the power companies. Hence, companies require to increase the price of the electricity which would not be pleasant for the general public. The lecturer, on the other hand, challenges that the handling of new regulations would cost around 15 billion dollars which companies can increase the price of electricity for consumers only 1 percent. This amount is very rational in order to have a clean environment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 289, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...e and might have negative consequences. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made...
^^^
Line 7, column 140, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'increasing'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'require' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: increasing
...wer companies. Hence, companies require to increase the price of the electricity which woul...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 217, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ity which would not be pleasant for the general public. The lecturer, on the other hand, chall...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, firstly, hence, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, for example, for instance, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1640.0 1373.03311258 119% => OK
No of words: 310.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29032258065 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67326533562 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 145.348785872 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538709677419 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 486.9 419.366225166 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => 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: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 51.191546123 49.2860985944 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.4705882353 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2352941176 21.698381199 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.05882352941 7.06452816374 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.556157147869 0.272083759551 204% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.164241904714 0.0996497079465 165% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.130949415736 0.0662205650399 198% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.329997817906 0.162205337803 203% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0402595849458 0.0443174109184 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.4 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.2 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.