wave-energy
Both of the reading passage and the lecture discuss about wave-energy. In the lecture, however, the professor casts doubt on the advantages of using wave-energy as alternative energy of fossil fuels, which were described in the reading.
First of all, the reading passage insist that amounts of energy made by ocean power is guranteed because people can forecast the patterns of the wave frequency due to past observations. However, professor insisted that generating energy from ocean is hard to foresee. To be more specific, according to lecture due to ongoing problem which is frequently malfuction of the generator, making hard to sustainable yield of energy every years.
Moreover, in contrast to the claim in the reading that wave-enery method are eco-friendly, the lecture insist that it is also not good for nature as fossil fuels. Specifically, the turbin which is one of main part of the generator contains some toxic chemical ingredients and it can effect something bad to the near areas.
Finally, according to the reading passage, wave facilities do not harmful affect to the scene of the nature. But, the lecture maintain that it can badly effect to the view of the near ocean. Because floating converter can visible to the tourists due to bright color and proximity with shore.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, so, in contrast, first of all, in contrast to
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 : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 8.0 22.412803532 36% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1086.0 1373.03311258 79% => OK
No of words: 212.0 270.72406181 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.12264150943 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.81578560438 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.728666564 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 122.0 145.348785872 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.575471698113 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 343.8 419.366225166 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.6917257978 49.2860985944 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.6 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.5 7.06452816374 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.324546571428 0.272083759551 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.121281105148 0.0996497079465 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.109395826057 0.0662205650399 165% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.201918681779 0.162205337803 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.139956292582 0.0443174109184 316% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.37 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.