TPO41
As stated in the reading passage, the author proposes 3 reasons that there shouldn't be new regulations for handling and storing coal ash, which is case serious doubt on by the listening passage which argues that coal ash storing and handling should have stricter regulations.
Firstly, as the author claims, regulations for coal ash already exist which prevent coal ash leak into the soil and pollute the environment. On the contrary, the speaker points out that the existing regulations are not sufficient since the regulations now is just for new pond and landfill the companies build. For those old pond and landfill, companies have no responsibility to use liner special material the old disposal. And thus, the coal ash will leak into the soil and deep into the ground water, Finally contaminate our drinking water. Accordingly, coal ash really threaten the environment and the regulation now is not enough, which proves the first viewpoint of reading passage is not credible.
Secondly, the writer argues that stricter regulations will lead to concerns about recycling coal ash because people will think it's a dangerous material and stopping using it. In contrast, the listening passage views that there will be no concern about recycling just because of strict regulation. For example, mercury is a dangerous material and there are very strict regulations for it. However, it recycles for 50 years after passing the regulation,which has never led to concerns from consumers. Thus, it is unreasonable for writer to worry about the recycling of coal ash under stricter regulation.
Finally, the author insists that increasing handling and disposal cost will increasing price of electricity,which wouldn't be welcome by the public. However, the lecturer contends with the reading passage again by arguing that the increasing coat is well-worthy. Although the handling of disposal would cost 50 billion for power companies, it will just increase average one percent of the electricity price in exchange of cleaner environment. Therefore, it is great to make a new regulation to handle and dispose coal ash, which challenges the writer's last point of view.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 76, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
...he author proposes 3 reasons that there shouldnt be new regulations for handling and sto...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 128, Rule ID: IT_IS[17]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
...ling coal ash because people will think its a dangerous material and stopping using...
^^^
Line 3, column 450, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , which
...or 50 years after passing the regulation,which has never led to concerns from consumer...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 9, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ash under stricter regulation. Finally, the author insists that increasing handl...
^^
Line 4, column 78, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'increase'
Suggestion: increase
...reasing handling and disposal cost will increasing price of electricity,which wouldnt be w...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 109, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , which
...ost will increasing price of electricity,which wouldnt be welcome by the public. Howev...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 116, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...l increasing price of electricity,which wouldnt be welcome by the public. However, the ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, finally, first, firstly, however, really, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, well, for example, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1817.0 1373.03311258 132% => OK
No of words: 344.0 270.72406181 127% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28197674419 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30665032142 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84836107791 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 540.0 419.366225166 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.2047760114 49.2860985944 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.133333333 110.228320801 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9333333333 21.698381199 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.4 7.06452816374 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.577900582326 0.272083759551 212% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.197249422699 0.0996497079465 198% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0964825629919 0.0662205650399 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.356064534565 0.162205337803 220% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0504420255626 0.0443174109184 114% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.3589403974 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.64 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.31 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 63.6247240618 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.