The bar chart shows different methods of waste disposal in four cities; Toronto, Madrid, Kuala Lumpur and Amman.
The chart illustrates the percentage of waste disposed by four popular ways, including landfill, incineration, recycling, and compositing in different melting pots all over the world.
Overall, the most favored methods of waste disposal are landfill and incineration while the composition and recycling are among the least popular. In addition, Toronto and Amman are recorded with the highest level of waste disposal by landfill, in contrast, Kuala Lumpur and Madrid prefer choosing incineration for disposal.
Look at the bar chart for more detail, we can see that Toronto holds the lion’s share of using landfill to dispose waste, at 74%, which is 25% higher than that of Amman, at 49%. Madrid is the third position and the bottom position belongs to Kuala Lumpur, at 29% and 14% respectively. Moreover, in terms of incineration method in disposing waste, Kuala Lumpur take the lead, at 55%, followed by Madrid, at 40%, Amman and Toronto have less interest in this method, accounting for 38% and 10% in that order.
According to bar chart, compositing shows the least enjoyed in disposing waste probably because of its negative effects. Madrid constitutes 9% in using compositing, and followed by Toronto, Kuala Lumpur, Amman at 7%, 6%, and 1%, respectively. Positively, recycling has more attention in waste disposal, with the highest positions are Madrid and Kuala Lumpur, at roughly 22%, while Amman and Toronto are relatively similar, at approximately 10%.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-08-18 | myra124 | 84 | view |
| 2019-06-10 | Jenny213987 | 78 | view |
- The charts below show the results of a questionnaire that asked visitors to the Parkway Hotel how they rated the hotel's customer service. The same questionnaire was given to 100 guests in the years 2005 and 2010. 73
- Individuals can do nothing to improve the environment; only governments and large companies can make a difference. 89
- The graph below shows the number of enquiries received by the Tourist Information Office in one city over a six-month period in 2011. 61
- The bar chart shows the scores of teams A, B and C over four differentseasons. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the mainfeatures and make comparisons where relevant. 56
- Percentage of UK people who consumed daily recommended amount of fruit and vegetable in 2002, 2006 and 2010. 67
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, look, moreover, third, while, in addition, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 6.8 191% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 33.7804878049 110% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 3.97073170732 201% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1240.0 965.302439024 128% => OK
No of words: 233.0 196.424390244 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32188841202 4.92477711251 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.90696013833 3.73543355544 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83125861515 2.65546596893 107% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 106.607317073 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.562231759657 0.547539520022 103% => OK
syllable_count: 378.0 283.868780488 133% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.482926829268 621% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 12.0 3.36585365854 357% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.4926829268 111% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.6940248073 43.030603864 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.777777778 112.824112599 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8888888889 22.9334400587 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.44444444444 5.23603664747 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 1.13902439024 439% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.09268292683 24% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.459409441562 0.215688989381 213% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.193861288009 0.103423049105 187% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0555577014496 0.0843802449381 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.273921577955 0.15604864568 176% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.067533813886 0.0819641961636 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 13.2329268293 125% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 61.2550243902 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 10.3012195122 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 11.4140731707 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.28 8.06136585366 115% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 40.7170731707 160% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.4329268293 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.9970731707 109% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.