In this set of materials, the reading and the lecture are both discussing coal ash wherein the reading states that the US government should regulate handling and storing coal ash, but the power companies have an opposite view. Moreover, the reading provides three arguments to support the power company’s position. However, the professor explains that the arguments presented by the author are unreliable and refutes each the author's points.
First, the author of the reading claims that regulations already exist differently. Companies use a liner layer to prevent coal ash from pass through the soil. The professor refutes this point by explaining that this method is used in the new land, but what about the old land. He mentions that in the old land there are no liner layers, which they cause several damages in the drinking water.
Secondly, the reading says that concrete and bricks that are from recycling coal ash will afraid the people. However, the professor says that people don not scare from recycling materials. Furthermore, he provides an example about Mercury, a hazard item, that people don not afraid of the Mercury recycling materials. In addition to that, they have bought this material form for many years.
Finally, the reading states that new regulations will increase the power cost by increasing handling and storing coal ash. The professor opposes this point by saying that increasing the power cost will not too big. More than that, the range of the rising cost is only one percent. Therefore, every person can pay the bill for electricity.
In conclusion, the three points that made in the lecture contrast with the reading. The first, second and third in the lecture demonstrate that arguments presented from power companies are in doubt.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, in addition, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => 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: 1488.0 1373.03311258 108% => OK
No of words: 290.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13103448276 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.512655246 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.513793103448 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 437.4 419.366225166 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.6327178568 49.2860985944 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.5294117647 110.228320801 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0588235294 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.23529411765 7.06452816374 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.27373068433 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.380427854063 0.272083759551 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.114346186175 0.0996497079465 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.115126733161 0.0662205650399 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199630732635 0.162205337803 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0777689011452 0.0443174109184 175% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 53.8541721854 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.69 8.42419426049 91% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.