Based on the set of materials, both the author and the speaker discuss the need for new and stricter regulations for handling and storing coal ash. The author stated that new regulations are not required and maybe have some negative ramifications, while the lecturer cast doubt on this idea and gave several counter arguments in response.
Initially, the author put forward the idea that current regulations are strict enough to prevent leakage of coal ash and environmental damage is minimum. On the contrary, the lecturer rejected this thesis by clarifying that present regulations are not sufficient as they just force new ponds and landfills to use liner and still old sites pollute the environment. Therefore, the rules are not good enough to reduce environmental damages and it should involve old sites to stop their leakage to the milieu.
Second, the author posited that the new rules may discourage consumers to use recycled coal ash as they think they are still too dangerous that government set new harsh regulations. Yet again, the lecturer repudiates this idea too. As she said this idea is not necessarily true and then mentioned the same situation in which people responded rationally to strict regulations and didn’t stop using dangerous products. The regulation has worked for 15 years and people are not afraid of that.
The last idea proposed in the reading was the huge-imposed cost of new regulations for energy companies. On the other hand, the lecturer states that though it is true that the cost is higher, it is not that significant for people as their bills are increased just by 1 percent and they can handle it in return of having a healthier environment.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, may, second, so, still, then, therefore, while, it is true, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1419.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 281.0 270.72406181 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04982206406 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09427095027 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75577685051 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.53024911032 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 435.6 419.366225166 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.4093705713 49.2860985944 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.0 110.228320801 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5454545455 21.698381199 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.90909090909 7.06452816374 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.363537194425 0.272083759551 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.136485750024 0.0996497079465 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0949749538071 0.0662205650399 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.223489882937 0.162205337803 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0328954706225 0.0443174109184 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.3589403974 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 53.8541721854 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.0289183223 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.31 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => 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.