Burning coal in power plants produces a waste product called coal ash, a material that contains small amounts of potentially harmful chemicals Environmentalists in the United States are concerned about the damage such harmful chemicals may be doing to the environment and suggest that the United States government should create new, much stricter regulations for handling and storing coal ash. However, representatives of power companies take the opposite view; they argue that new regulations are unnecessary and might actually have negative consequences They use the following arguments to support their position. Regulations Exist First, power company representatives point out that effective environmental regulations already exist. For example, one very important regulation requires companies to use liner-special material that prevents coal ash components from leaking into the soil and contaminating the surrounding environment. Companies that dispose of coal ash in disposal ponds or landfills must use liner in every new pond or landfill they build. Concerns About Recycling Coal Ash Second, some analysts predict that creating very strict rules for storing and handling coal ash might discourage the recycling of coal ash into other products Currently, a large portion of coal ash generated by power plants is recycled: it is used, for example, in building materials such as concrete and bricks Recycling coal ash reduces the need to dispose of it in other ways and presents no environmental danger. However, if new, stricter rules are adopted for handling coal ash, consumers may become concerned that recycled coal ash products are just too dangerous, and may stop buying the products Increased Cost Finally, strict new regulations would result in a significant increase in disposal and handling costs for the power companies. perhaps as much as ten times the current costs. Power companies would be forced to increase the price of electricity, which would not be welcomed by the general public
The reading passage discusses the views of representatives of power companies regarding new and stricter regulations for dealing and storing of coal ash. The lecturer, however, refutes the reasons and believes these suggestions are inaccurate and wrong.
First, the reading suggests that effective regulations are currently at use and there is no need for new regulations. In contrast, the lecturer maintains that the existing regulations are not effective enough. For example in power plants, liner, which is a very dangerous material, is required to be used in the new pond or land fill but not in the old sites. As a result coal ash will leak to the ground and contaminate drinking water. She suggests that rules must be applied to all sites regardless of being old or new.
Second, the reading thinks that new rules will discourage other companies to recycle coal ash into new products. It might give the feeling that coal ash is a hazardous material. Conversely, the lecturer believes that new rules will not stop others from using coal ash. She offers that other companies use mercury which is a very dangerous material and despite there are strict rules about it, it is being used safely for 50 years. she thinks that consumers won't fear.
Finally, the reading believes that new regulations will increase the cost of electricity for power companies and hence the general public. Conversely, the lecturer thinks that cost for end users will not increase dramatically. She states that the increased overall cost for companies will be about 15 million dollars but it will totally worth the price since it will be divided through general public and the amount of increase will be about 1 percent for every family. She believes that it is not a big price for having a clean environment.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-03 | YasamanEsml | 80 | view |
| 2023-06-11 | Vivian Chang | 3 | view |
| 2023-06-09 | Zmx_6 | 80 | view |
| 2023-06-09 | Zmx_6 | 3 | view |
| 2023-04-01 | tststs | 3 | view |
- Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific arguments presented in the reading passage 3
- Which one do you prefer? Why? 1) a company offering you a job with challenging and interesting projects but less vacation days or 2) another company offering you a job that is not so challenging and interesting but has more vacation days. 70
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Movies and television have more negative effects thanpositive effects on the way young people behave. 73
- Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific arguments presented in the reading passage 3
- Overall, the widespread use of the internet has a mostly positive effect on life in today's world." Use reasons and details to support your opinion. 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 432, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
..., it is being used safely for 50 years. she thinks that consumers wont fear. F...
^^^
Line 13, column 124, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...icity for power companies and hence the general public. Conversely, the lecturer thinks that c...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 247, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...crease dramatically. She states that the increased overall cost for companies wil...
^^
Line 13, column 388, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
... price since it will be divided through general public and the amount of increase will be abou...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, hence, however, regarding, second, so, for example, in contrast, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => 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: 1507.0 1373.03311258 110% => OK
No of words: 300.0 270.72406181 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02333333333 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64029459636 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.493333333333 0.540411800872 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 459.9 419.366225166 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.9879135174 49.2860985944 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.1875 110.228320801 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.75 21.698381199 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.8125 7.06452816374 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.116400956341 0.272083759551 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0438670408054 0.0996497079465 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0396499246204 0.0662205650399 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0792634364535 0.162205337803 49% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0201350981693 0.0443174109184 45% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.3589403974 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.