Glass is a favored building material for modern architecture, yet it is also very dangerous for wild birds. Because they often cannot distinguish between glass and open air, millions of birds are harmed every year when they try to fly through glass windows. There are, however, several solutions that responsible businesses can use to prevent injuries to birds.
One-Way Glass
One solution is to replace the regular, clear glass with one-way glass that is transparent in only one direction. The occupants of the building can see out, but birds and others cannot see in. If birds cannot see through a window, they will understand that the glass forms a solid barrier and will not try to fly through it.
Colorful Designs
A second solution is to paint colorful lines or other designs on regular window glass. For example, a window could have a design of thin stripes painted over the glass. People would still be able to see through the openings in the design where there is no paint, while birds would see the stripes and thus avoid trying to fly through the glass. Architects can be encouraged to include colorful painted patterns on glass as part of the general design of buildings.
Magnetic Field
The third solution is to create an artificial magnetic field to guide birds away from buildings. Humans use an instrument called a magnetic compass to determine directions—either north, south, east, or west. Bird research has shown that birds have a natural ability to sense Earth’s magnetic fields; this ability works just like a compass, and it helps birds navigate in the right direction when they fly. A building in a bird flight path can be equipped with powerful electromagnets that emit magnetic signals that steer birds in a direction away from the building.
The article discusses the effect of using glass in buildings on harming the birds that cannot recognize it and try to fly through glass windows and suggests three ways to prevent injuries. However, the professor thinks that none of these methods will stop the birds from harming and refutes each of the author's reasons.
First, the passage claims that using one-way glass is an effective method. One-way glass enables the people indoor to see the outside but from the outdoor neither the birds nor humans can see inside the building. However, the professor states that this kind of glass act just like a mirror and reflects the natural views of the outside, hence, the birds would not be able to differentiate between the actual view and the reflection and as a result they would try to fly toward them.
Second, the reading states that architects can use colorful designs on the glass such as painting colorful strips on the glass which not only does maintain the ability of the occupants to see outside but also will prevent the birds from colliding into them. However, the professor claims that the bird would assume the free un-painted area as holes and would try to fly through them.
Third, the article states that generating magnetic field around buildings will help the birds to recognize the building since they have the ability to detect the earth's magnetic field and use it as an aid for navigating, hence the artificial magnetic field will distract them from the buildings. Nevertheless, the lecturer refutes the effectiveness of this method by saying that the birds use this ability just for long trips, for example when they are migrating. In short trips, like trips in a city, they use their eye and the brightness to find their way.
- Cane toads fast spread 80
- Robert E. Peary was a well-known adventurer and arctic explorer who in 1909 set out to reach the North Pole. When he returned from the expedition, he claimed to have reached the pole on April 7, 1909. This report made him into an international celebrity. 87
- The hypotheses about the decline of cedar tree 80
- Ethanol fuel as a replacement for gasoline and its consequences 60
- Interpretations of the evidences in T. Rex bones 75
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, third, for example, in short, kind of, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 10.4613686534 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1459.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 299.0 270.72406181 110% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87959866221 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.33648845684 2.5805825403 91% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 145.348785872 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.505016722408 0.540411800872 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 423.0 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 29.0 21.2450331126 137% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 72.7354109083 49.2860985944 148% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.9 110.228320801 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.9 21.698381199 138% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.3 7.06452816374 174% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.263039986424 0.272083759551 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.106831737734 0.0996497079465 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0695627890126 0.0662205650399 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167428200053 0.162205337803 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0407607247005 0.0443174109184 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 13.3589403974 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.96 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.2 11.0289183223 111% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.62 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.3 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.498013245 130% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.