The reading and the lecture discuss the coal ash, which is a potential pollutant produced by burning coal in power plants, and its current regulations which should be updated. The author believes that the current regulations of this material are enough to stop the most negative consequences. The professor brings into question the claims made in the article. He considers that it is really necessary new ones because the current ones are not enough strict for handling and storing coal ash.
First, the author comes up with the idea that the effective regulations already exist. It is mentioned that the use of liner-special material prevent coal ash components to leak into the soil and thus contaminate the environment. However, the professor argues that liner is not sufficient to control the spread of this material. He says that it works just in new pond or landfill to remove the coal ash, but in the old pond, it does not work.
Second, the author states that the creation of the new strict rules could discourage people who recycle coal ash into other products because consumers of the products made by the recycled coal ash would know about the danger of this material. The professor rebuts this argument by pointing out that this friendly-recycle measure would not change, because people are already using those products.
Finally, the author contends that there would be an increase in the coal ash’s cost for power companies which help to dispose of this material, also companies would need to increase the price because of the increase of electricity’s price. The professor, on the other hand, posits that although the price increase, it would not cause any big deal for businesses because the electricity counts just 1% of the whole bill
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 294, 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.
...to stop the most negative consequences. The professor brings into question the clai...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, really, second, so, thus, 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: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1483.0 1373.03311258 108% => OK
No of words: 293.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0614334471 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13729897018 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67716060434 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529010238908 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 444.6 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.9686779499 49.2860985944 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.583333333 110.228320801 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4166666667 21.698381199 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.58333333333 7.06452816374 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => 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: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.509354775689 0.272083759551 187% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.170198984027 0.0996497079465 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.123158070723 0.0662205650399 186% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.301591003147 0.162205337803 186% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0360583700484 0.0443174109184 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.28 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.