The passage provides us with three methods to reverse the trend which is threatening the lake's health while the professor has enough reasons to feel that non-of them are realistic or practical.
The first way to reach that end is that salt should be extracted from the lake's water directly by special desalination facilities. The lecturer believes that it is possible to remove the salt in that way, but it may have serious problems for people's health. That is because of solid materials which will remain after the main process, also they contain some chemical toxic substances. When these substances are released into air, it can have bad impacts on humans' bodies.
Second method for solving that problem is to dilute the salt level in the lake with water from the ocean while the professor completely disagrees and thinks that it needs a lot of pipelines and channels. Government cannot provide resources for paying money which is needed for implementing of that project, which is about one hundred kilometer long. As a result, it is not so practical that the government can do it.
Constructing walls to divide the lake into many part for controlling that problem is considered as the last method. Whereas the lecturer supposes that it is unlikely to work for a long time since it is possible that some earthquakes happen in that region which can destroy the walls. Therefore, this solution may be practical for a short while, but major earthquake can ruin the walls and return the salt into the main section of the lake. Hence, this method can be a great idea only for short time.
In brief, although the passage claims that those solutions are realistic, the professor believes that non-of them is practical.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 90, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lakes'' or 'lake's'?
Suggestion: lakes'; lake's
...erse the trend which is threatening the lakes health while the professor has enough r...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 131, 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.
...tly by special desalination facilities. The lecturer believes that it is possible t...
^^^
Line 4, column 44, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun part seems to be countable; consider using: 'many parts'.
Suggestion: many parts
...structing walls to divide the lake into many part for controlling that problem is conside...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, may, second, so, therefore, whereas, while, in brief, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 12.0772626932 182% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1427.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 292.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.88698630137 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50016653602 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 145.348785872 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.571917808219 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 432.0 419.366225166 103% => 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: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
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: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.9258291263 49.2860985944 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.769230769 110.228320801 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4615384615 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.92307692308 7.06452816374 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.290740192713 0.272083759551 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.102669020055 0.0996497079465 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.109169417633 0.0662205650399 165% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.139943621935 0.162205337803 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0768491513915 0.0443174109184 173% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.38 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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.