The graph below shows the production levels of main fuels in a European country from 1981 to 2000.
The graph illustrates the volume of main fuels generated in a European country over a 19-year period from 1981 to 2000.
Overall, a significantly upward trend applied to the generation of petroleum and natural gas, whereas there was a dramatic fall in the production of coal in a European country between 1981 and 2000. Additionally, petroleum was the most released fuel.
As can be seen from the graph, in 1981, petroleum was the most produced fuel, at 95 tonnes, over double the quantity of natural gas generated, at 40 tonnes. Coal was the second most released fuel, at 80 tonnes.
From 1981 to 2000, the quantity of petroleum generated witnessed a considerable rise to 130 tonnes, but there was a marked decrease to 90 tonnes, followed by a recovery to 120 tonnes. The generation of natural gas stayed unchanged, then it followed by a dramatic rise to 80 tonnes. On the contrary, there was a significant decline of 50% in the volume of coal released to 40 tonnes.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-02-23 | phuongphungyen | 73 | view |
| 2020-11-04 | Yennhii12 | 84 | view |
- The line 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 73
- The graph below shows the changes in maximum number of Asian elephants between 1997 and 2004 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 87
- Many criminals reoffend after they have been punished Why do some people continue to commit crimes after they have been punished and what measures can be taken to tackle this problem 73
- The graph below shows the production levels of main fuels in a European country from 1981 to 2000 73
- In some countries people prefer to live alone more often than in the past Do you think this is a positive or a negative development 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, second, then, whereas, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.48453608247 94% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 4.92783505155 20% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 5.05154639175 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 0.0 3.03092783505 0% => OK
Pronoun: 1.0 32.9175257732 3% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 26.3917525773 125% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.85567010309 78% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 805.0 937.175257732 86% => OK
No of words: 168.0 206.0 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.79166666667 4.54256449028 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.60020574368 3.78020617076 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80729708975 2.54303337028 110% => OK
Unique words: 82.0 127.690721649 64% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.488095238095 0.622605031667 78% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 242.1 290.88556701 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.41237113402 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 9.13402061856 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 0.824742268041 485% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 1.83505154639 54% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.463917525773 216% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 1.44329896907 485% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 12.6804123711 63% => 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 16.3608247423 128% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 51.8746987943 44.8134815571 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.625 76.5299724578 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 16.8248392259 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.875 4.34317383033 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.29896907216 93% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 2.54639175258 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 7.41237113402 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.49484536082 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.94845360825 101% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.238579765377 0.216113520407 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120302038459 0.0766984524023 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.131771135268 0.0603063233224 219% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199473710642 0.12726935374 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.141396438025 0.0580467560999 244% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 8.37731958763 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 70.7449484536 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 3.82989690722 230% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 7.45979381443 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 8.71597938144 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.59 7.59969072165 100% => OK
difficult_words: 31.0 41.2886597938 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 8.62886597938 127% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 8.54432989691 122% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 8.15463917526 135% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.