The pie charts show the electricity generated in Germany and France from all sources and renewables in the year 2009. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.
The four pie charts compare the electricity generated between Germany and France during 2009, and it is measured in billions kWh.
Overall, it can be seen that conventional thermal was the main source of electricity in Germany, whereas nuclear was the main source in France.
The bulk of electricity in Germany, whose total output was 560 billion kWh, came from conventional thermal, at 59.6%. In France, the total output was lower, at 510 billion kWh, and in contrast to Germany, conventional thermal accounted for just 10.3%, with most electricity coming from nuclear power (76%). In Germany, the proportion of nuclear power generated electricity was only one fifth of the total.
Moving on to renewables, this accounted for quite similar proportions for both countries, at approximately 15% of the total electricity generated. In detail, in Germany, most of the renewables consisted of wind and biomass, totaling around 75%, which was far higher than for hydroelectric (17.7%) and solar (6.1%). The situation was very different in France, where hydroelectric made up 80.5% of renewable electricity, with biomass, wind and solar making up the remaining 20%. 183)
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-07-25 | wokoma elisha | 67 | view |
| 2021-07-02 | rahulchd | 90 | view |
| 2021-04-18 | dhillonsukh | 73 | view |
| 2020-12-11 | smyth | 56 | view |
| 2020-09-25 | Turonxoja | 84 | view |
- the diagram below shows the life cycle of a frog summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features 91
- The diagram below illustrates how glass is recycled Summarie the information by selecting and reporting the main features and mak Connlparills whiere relevant
- This diagram demonstrates the process of making bricks that used for the building industry 56
- The chart shows British Emigration to selected destinations between 2004 and 2007 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 84
- The charts below give information ow the satisfaction levels wit ahe cdrcation system in fore afferent counries from 1990 to 2010 Summarise the inforwation by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparison where relevant 76
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, so, whereas, in contrast, in contrast to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 33.7804878049 98% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 983.0 965.302439024 102% => OK
No of words: 184.0 196.424390244 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.34239130435 4.92477711251 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.68302321012 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90133414817 2.65546596893 109% => OK
Unique words: 106.0 106.607317073 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.576086956522 0.547539520022 105% => OK
syllable_count: 287.1 283.868780488 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 3.36585365854 267% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => 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: 26.0 22.4926829268 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.6549824607 43.030603864 125% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.428571429 112.824112599 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.2857142857 22.9334400587 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.28571428571 5.23603664747 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 3.70975609756 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.163224872889 0.215688989381 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0781168377353 0.103423049105 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0750978997858 0.0843802449381 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126803432943 0.15604864568 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.073532401352 0.0819641961636 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 13.2329268293 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 61.2550243902 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.3012195122 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.99 11.4140731707 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.06136585366 102% => OK
difficult_words: 38.0 40.7170731707 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.4329268293 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.9970731707 113% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.