Percentage of different type of waste recycled.
The bar chart compares the recycling rates of four different kinds of waste material, namely plastic, cans, paper, and glass, in a city from 1992 to 2002.
Looking at the graph, it is immediately obvious that the percentage of all types of reproduced waste generally increased over the period. Additionally, while glass was the most recycled rubbish material, the opposite was true for plastic during the majority of the period.
Paper and Glass were the two most remanufactured sorts of waste throughout most of the period. Beginning at approximately 14% and 15% respectively, both figures rose considerably to 21% and 29%. By the end of the period, the total of the proportions of both these reprocessing materials was nearly three times as much as that of plastic and cans, at almost 40% and 50%.
Regarding the two remaining wastes, plastic and cans were recycled far less, with the figures starting at around 10% and 9% sequentially in the first year of the survey. Over the five years ensuing, the number of rehabilitated cans to use went up to about 16%, while the increase of plastic was roughly 1%. In the last five years, the rate of reprocessed plastic remained the same, however, the data for cans remanufactured elevated to nearly 20% in 2002.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-11-04 | khanhkhanhlhp | view | |
| 2024-11-04 | khanhkhanhlhp | view | |
| 2024-11-04 | khanhkhanhlhp | view | |
| 2024-11-04 | khanhkhanhlhp | view | |
| 2024-11-04 | khanhkhanhlhp | 89 | view |
- The charts below show the percentage of people aged 23 65 in di erent occupations in one UK town Ashby and in the UK as a whole in 2008 78
- The charts show the percentage of income spent on food and other goods in 3 European countries from 1998 2008 78
- Waste disposal in one European country 2005 2008 59
- In some parts of the world it is increasingly popular to research the history of one s own family Why do people want to do this Is it a positive or negative development 84
- The chart below shows a comparison of di erent kinds of energy production in France in 1995 and 2005 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, look, regarding, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 33.7804878049 118% => 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: 1047.0 965.302439024 108% => OK
No of words: 213.0 196.424390244 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91549295775 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82027741392 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80115316181 2.65546596893 105% => OK
Unique words: 125.0 106.607317073 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.586854460094 0.547539520022 107% => OK
syllable_count: 315.0 283.868780488 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
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: 23.0 22.4926829268 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 26.0128173535 43.030603864 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.333333333 112.824112599 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6666666667 22.9334400587 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.11111111111 5.23603664747 98% => 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 : 3.0 1.13902439024 263% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.174726700076 0.215688989381 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0667436282285 0.103423049105 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.081920565092 0.0843802449381 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115317433813 0.15604864568 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0844055923633 0.0819641961636 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.2329268293 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 61.2550243902 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 11.4140731707 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.06136585366 106% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 40.7170731707 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.4329268293 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.9970731707 102% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => 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.