The passage provides the statement that new regulations for handling and storing coal ash is unnecessary and might have negative results. It brings three main reasons to back up this idea. However, the professor in the lecture casts doubt on that and does not validate the hypothesis and its information mentioned in the passage by suggesting a number of points which contradict them.
First, the passage states that companies must use a liner in every new pond or landfill they build. On the contrary, the professor shares this idea is not sufficient because she brings up the reason that it requires to add this liner-special material in all landfills and ponds for preventing them from leaking into the soil and contaminating the nearby environment. So, she believes it needs to create strict regulations in this area.
Furthermore, the text asserts that this new rules can affect on recycling of coal ash because of thinking of it is dangerous. On the other hand, the professor says that this idea is not to be taken seriously due to the fact that in other dangerous materials we have a different experience. For example in using mercury despite taking some tough rules for storing or handling it, it had not bad consequences in using it.
Finally, the reading holds the view that a significant increase in cost for companies is the result of the strict new rules. Conversely, the lecturer refutes this point by underlining the fact that companies' cost is already high and this new regulation just makes it in average 1 percent increase for consumers. This increase is not too much to pay for having a clean environment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 217, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'adding'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'require' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: adding
...e brings up the reason that it requires to add this liner-special material in all land...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 55, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'effect'?
Suggestion: effect
...he text asserts that this new rules can affect on recycling of coal ash because of thinki...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, so, for example, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1358.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 276.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92028985507 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75957594556 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.561594202899 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 414.0 419.366225166 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => 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: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.0886809992 49.2860985944 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.166666667 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0 21.698381199 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.75 7.06452816374 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => 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: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.353411888671 0.272083759551 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.133094354483 0.0996497079465 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0919846452324 0.0662205650399 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.208629983406 0.162205337803 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0172482304967 0.0443174109184 39% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 53.8541721854 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => 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.