The graph below shows the quantities of goods transported in the UK between 1974 and 2002 by four different modes of transport.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant
The line chart compares the four categories of transport in terms of the number of goods transported in the UK over the 28-years period.
It can be seen that the was a significant rise in the goods transported number by four transport. Of the four items, the transport of goods by road was the highest.
By 1974, over 70 million tonnes were transported by road, while the shipping by pipeline was around 5 million tonnes. Both water and rail figures were similar, approximately 40 million tonnes. In 1992, goods shipping by road, water and pipeline rose, while rail fell dramatically.
In 1996, the number of goods transported by road was a considerable drop, stood at just under 80 million tonnes, before rising back to nearly 100 million tonnes at the end of the period. Whereas the figures for pipeline transported reach to peak at over 20 million tonnes, and after remaining stable in 2002. The quantities of products shipping by water were much higher than rail, around over 60 million and over 40 million tonnes respectively
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-21 | PsycRicky | 56 | view |
| 2020-01-16 | Raksadil | 73 | view |
| 2020-01-16 | Adilrahi | 73 | view |
| 2019-12-27 | happyhappy | 61 | view |
| 2019-11-28 | bibikulsum | 84 | view |
- The chart below shows the number of men and women in further education inBritain in three periods and whether they were studying fulltime or part-time.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, andmake comparisons where releva 73
- The chart below shows the percentage of male and female teachers in six different types of educational setting in the UK in 2010 56
- The chart below shows the value of one country's exports in various categories during 2015 and 2016. The table shows the percentage change in each category or exports in 2016 compared with 2015. 73
- The charts below show the percentage of water used by different sectors in Sydney, Australia, in 1997 and 2007.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The bar chart shows the scores of teams A, B and C over four different seasons 61
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, whereas, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 7.0 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 33.7804878049 110% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 860.0 965.302439024 89% => OK
No of words: 176.0 196.424390244 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.88636363636 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.64232057368 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66665590563 2.65546596893 100% => OK
Unique words: 88.0 106.607317073 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.547539520022 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 246.6 283.868780488 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.092822241 43.030603864 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.5555555556 112.824112599 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5555555556 22.9334400587 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.0 5.23603664747 38% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.169602458609 0.215688989381 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0947644509767 0.103423049105 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0745595243673 0.0843802449381 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140750185286 0.15604864568 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0749656598806 0.0819641961636 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 13.2329268293 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 61.2550243902 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 10.3012195122 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.08 11.4140731707 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.82 8.06136585366 85% => OK
difficult_words: 25.0 40.7170731707 61% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.4329268293 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.0658536585 72% => 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.