TPO36Hail—pieces of ice that form and fall from clouds instead of snow or rain—has always been a problem for farmers in some areas of the United States. Hail pellets can fall with great force and destroy crops in the field. Over the last few decades,

Essay topics:

TPO36

Hail—pieces of ice that form and fall from clouds instead of snow or rain—has always been a problem for farmers in some areas of the United States. Hail pellets can fall with great force and destroy crops in the field. Over the last few decades, a method of reducing hail, called "cloud seeding," has been tried. In cloud seeding, the chemical silver iodide is sprayed on storm clouds from an airplane. This makes the clouds produce harmless rain or snow instead of hail. Several pieces of evidence suggest that cloud seeding has been effective in protecting crops from hail.

Laboratory experiments

Experiments in the laboratory support the idea that cloud seeding is effective. Hail usually forms water vapor that is close to the freezing point However, when experimenters added silver iodide to cold water vapor in the laboratory, they often observed light snow forming instead of hail pellets.

Evidence from Asia

There is evidence about the effectiveness of cloud seeding from several countries around the world. In some Asian countries, for example, cloud seeding has been successfully used to control precipitation in urban areas. These positive results suggest that cloud seeding should also be effective in protecting fields and farms in the United States.

Local studies

A few local studies also support the value of cloud seeding. One study conducted in a farming region in the central United States, for example, directly monitored crop damage due to hail. The study found that in an area where cloud seeding was used there was reduced hail damage compared to previous years.

The reading passage and the lecture both discuss the effect of 'cloud seeding' in reducing the harmful effect of hail. In the reading part, the author mentons that there are several fact that shows cloud seeding would be impact in this issue. In the listening part, however, the speaker challenges what the author ststes and rebuts the reasons.

To begin with, as mentioned in the article, the athour sets forth that labratory experiences indecate that by adding silver iodide to the cloulds, we can control hail and produce harmless rains or snows; nevertheless, in the listening part the lecturer refutes the reasons asserting that the reasons just mentioend are not clear enough, for example adding silver have any prosipitations such as in the reigon that there is no rain enough, it causes drough and lack of water for growing crops.

Secondly, the author points out that in the Asian countries, this method workes well and control hail in urban cities. Nonetheless, the professor flatly contradicts the reason and contends that it migh have work in urban earies that has varies pollution in the air, but in the rural eiria whish is emthy of pollution may not work and cannot reapet in us, becouse of the favorable sitiation for cloud seeding is in the urban riegon.

Finally, the author claims that few studies in local airia in us indicate that clould seeding causes reduce the hail damages. In contrast, the professor is of the opinion that studies illustrated that it workes not becouse of the cloud seeding, while, the reasons was natural weather which reduces the hail.

Votes
Average: 0.3 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 173, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun fact seems to be countable; consider using: 'several facts'.
Suggestion: several facts
...part, the author mentons that there are several fact that shows cloud seeding would be impac...
^^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, however, may, nevertheless, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, well, while, for example, in contrast, such as, to begin with

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1322.0 1373.03311258 96% => OK
No of words: 266.0 270.72406181 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96992481203 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03850299372 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.3703178942 2.5805825403 92% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.556390977444 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 387.9 419.366225166 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 13.0662251656 61% => 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: 33.0 21.2450331126 155% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 129.023253718 49.2860985944 262% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 165.25 110.228320801 150% => OK
Words per sentence: 33.25 21.698381199 153% => OK
Discourse Markers: 17.25 7.06452816374 244% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.092092766124 0.272083759551 34% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0367284135901 0.0996497079465 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0222263282086 0.0662205650399 34% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0531186510079 0.162205337803 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.018377068568 0.0443174109184 41% => 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: 18.6 13.3589403974 139% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.44 53.8541721854 86% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.0289183223 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.14 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.67 8.42419426049 115% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.2 10.498013245 145% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.

Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.