TPO41 Integrated
Both the reading and the listening discuss about whether the government should create a much stricter law for processing and storing coal ash. In the reading passage, representatives of power companies take the opposite view; however, the professor in the listening firmly states that a stricter regulation should be created. Detailed reasons go follows.
First of all, the reading claims that a crucial regulation that requires companies to use linear material to prevent from contaminating the environment already exists. However, the speaker in the lecture casts doubts on the point by stating that the law is only applied to new ponds or landfills. In this way, companies can still use old ponds, and serious damages will hurt the environment by leaking the ash into the soil on old ponds. Consequently, there should be a new and stricter regulation for old ponds.
Secondly, it is argued that a stricter law on recycling coal ash will reduce the willingness of consumers to purchase their products; however, the scholar in the listening refuted the idea by providing an example of mercuries. Also, she mentions that this worry is unnecessary. In that example, although mercuries are restricted to be recycled in a strict way, consumers still purchase their products. As a result, it is implied that the concern is redundant, and a stricter regulation should be set.
Last but not least, the representatives from companies suggests that a stricter law will cause much increase on the disposal and handling cost of coal ash. Still, the speaker in the listening rebuts the idea by illustrating that the cost is rather small and will not influence the people. She mentions that the total cost for handling and disposal is about 15 billion dollars, and after detailed calculation, an only increase of 1 percent will affect in the end. Compared to damages to the environment, the extra cost is not as big as that pollution. As a result, she suggested that a stricter law should inargueably be applied to the companies.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 345, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a strict way" with adverb for "strict"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...mercuries are restricted to be recycled in a strict way, consumers still purchase their product...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, however, second, secondly, so, still, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1699.0 1373.03311258 124% => OK
No of words: 334.0 270.72406181 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08682634731 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27500489853 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86138744274 2.5805825403 111% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.476047904192 0.540411800872 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 499.5 419.366225166 119% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.8516157587 49.2860985944 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.1875 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.875 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.9375 7.06452816374 84% => OK
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 : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.385550475103 0.272083759551 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113420989297 0.0996497079465 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0833146987398 0.0662205650399 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.22741267232 0.162205337803 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0279572394559 0.0443174109184 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 63.6247240618 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.