The pie charts illustrate the generation amount of electricity from various fuel resources in two countries between 1980 and 2000.
It can be clearly seen that the generated units were also increased in Australia and France whereas the importance of natural gas was decreased. Overall, one interesting fact was that the development of nuclear power was only applied in France.
In 1980, the total electricity generation from the two countries was almost 100 and 90 units for Australia and France, where the largest component came from coal at 50 and 25 units independently. The significance of natural gas was the same vital as coal in France while the contribution was lower with hydro power at 20 units in Australia. As far as the least generation in Australia and France, there were oil and hydro power at 10 and 5 units separately.
Over 20 years, the distribution of total production changed dramatically. As for total production, the generation in Australia rose to 170 units as well as an increase was realized in France by 90 units. Coal generation was still the biggest, which raised to 130 units sharply, although produced units remained unchanged in France. Also, the generated Hydropower was increased to 36 units in Australia despite there were just 2 units produced with Natural gas in France. Moreover, Nuclear power became the most popular in France at 126 units suddenly. Lastly, oil and coal were fell to 2 units individually as well as be the least in Australia.
- The charts below give information on the ages of the populations of Yemen and Italy in 2000 and projections for 2050Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant 84
- The chart shows how frequently people in the USA ate fast food in restaurants between 2003 and 2013. 78
- The chart below shows the total number of minutes (in billions) of telephone calls In the UK, divided into three categories, from 1995-2002.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 78
- Many museums charge for admission while others are free. Do you think the advantages of charging for admission outweigh the disadvantages? 56
- The pie charts beloww show units of electricity production by fuel source in Australia and France in 1980 and 2000. 67
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, lastly, moreover, so, still, well, whereas, while, as for, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 7.0 214% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 6.8 132% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 3.97073170732 302% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1239.0 965.302439024 128% => OK
No of words: 248.0 196.424390244 126% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99596774194 4.92477711251 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96837696647 3.73543355544 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84454301215 2.65546596893 107% => OK
Unique words: 123.0 106.607317073 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.495967741935 0.547539520022 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 382.5 283.868780488 135% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 8.94146341463 134% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.0419646713 43.030603864 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.25 112.824112599 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6666666667 22.9334400587 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 5.23603664747 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 3.70975609756 189% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.254794723721 0.215688989381 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10475744861 0.103423049105 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0626692166436 0.0843802449381 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.174935254224 0.15604864568 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0704854992354 0.0819641961636 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 13.2329268293 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 61.2550243902 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.72 11.4140731707 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.13 8.06136585366 101% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 40.7170731707 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.4329268293 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.