The argument consists many unstated assumptions and unaswered questions, which is followed by bold claims. It is crucial to address these gaps in the argument to decide wheter the city council's proposal will actually help to save money or if it just a waste of valuable resources which could otherwise used to improve other aspects of the city.
The argument is based on the assumption that incandescent bulbs (IBs) contribute to major portion to the city's electrical expenses. The author, however, does not provide any data to support this unstated assumtion. We would require data regarding the number of IBs in all the public buildings of the city to consider whether the switch from IBs to LEDs would indeed lead to a significant reduction in the overall electric expenses.
The author further ignores the various other factors such as air conditioners, ceiling and table fans, televisions, etc. that could contribute to the electric expenses. Is the cost portion of IBs comparable to the cost of the above mentioned factors? It could be possible that IBs contribute to only 10% of the total electric expenses. It this is true, it would seriously undermine the council's prediction.
The author also fails to provide data regarding the difference in expenses that would result from the switch from IBs to LEDs, or whether it would lead to any difference at all. He only mentions that they "burn brighter and cost no more to purchase" - which is insufficient to conclude that the switch would help the city council to save money.
Another aspect to be considered is the life of LEDs. Is its life analogous to that of IBs? If the life of LEDs turn out to be lesser than that of IBs then it could result in an opposite result, i.e., an increase in electric expenses since repeated puchases would be required to replace the dead LEDs.
The major flaws in the argument lie in the unstated assumptions and the lack of reliable data to supprot the claims. Addressing the questions mentioned above would help to evaluate the efficacy of the city council's proposal, and make their prediction more credible.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 186, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'councils'' or 'council's'?
Suggestion: councils'; council's
... the argument to decide wheter the city councils proposal will actually help to save mon...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tion in the overall electric expenses. The author further ignores the various o...
^^^
Line 5, column 387, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'councils'' or 'council's'?
Suggestion: councils'; council's
... true, it would seriously undermine the councils prediction. The author also fails to...
^^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 207, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'councils'' or 'council's'?
Suggestion: councils'; council's
...lp to evaluate the efficacy of the city councils proposal, and make their prediction mor...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, regarding, so, then, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1767.0 2260.96107784 78% => OK
No of words: 356.0 441.139720559 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.96348314607 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34372677135 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68304938669 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.494382022472 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 546.3 705.55239521 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.6377318741 57.8364921388 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.8 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7333333333 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.13333333333 5.70786347227 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.243627386793 0.218282227539 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0747260308884 0.0743258471296 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0692704481464 0.0701772020484 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117551097995 0.128457276422 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0769295932155 0.0628817314937 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 98.500998004 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 186, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'councils'' or 'council's'?
Suggestion: councils'; council's
... the argument to decide wheter the city councils proposal will actually help to save mon...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tion in the overall electric expenses. The author further ignores the various o...
^^^
Line 5, column 387, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'councils'' or 'council's'?
Suggestion: councils'; council's
... true, it would seriously undermine the councils prediction. The author also fails to...
^^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 207, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'councils'' or 'council's'?
Suggestion: councils'; council's
...lp to evaluate the efficacy of the city councils proposal, and make their prediction mor...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, regarding, so, then, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1767.0 2260.96107784 78% => OK
No of words: 356.0 441.139720559 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.96348314607 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34372677135 4.56307096286 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68304938669 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 204.123752495 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.494382022472 0.468620217663 105% => OK
syllable_count: 546.3 705.55239521 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.6377318741 57.8364921388 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.8 119.503703932 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7333333333 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.13333333333 5.70786347227 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.243627386793 0.218282227539 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0747260308884 0.0743258471296 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0692704481464 0.0701772020484 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.117551097995 0.128457276422 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0769295932155 0.0628817314937 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 98.500998004 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.