Integrated TPO 41
The article brings three reasons to prove that creating much stricter regulations for companies in order to control the amount of ash they release in the environment, is not a good idea. However, the professor puts those reasons under question. According to the professor, there should be much stricter rules for some reasons, which will be discussed in the following.
The first argument brought by the passage is that effective regulations for companies already exist. For instance, the companies should use liner material that prevents coal ash components leaking to water supplies. Nonetheless, the professor asserts that the regulations are not sufficient enough. Not only factories are old, but also do not consist of lands and systems in order to use liner material. Therefore, harmful materials leak to underground supply and contaminate the drinking water.
Another concern raised by the article is that creating new rules might discourage other companies to buy coal ash from main companies and recycle it. In fact, consumers concern that recycling this material would be dangerous for them. In contrast, the professor opposed this belief by bringing an example about mercury. She mentioned, also there are strict rules for transporting and using mercury in companies, it is about 50 years that this material is recycled and consumers are not worried about it.
The final contradiction between the article and the professor is whether setting new rules increasing the cost of electricity, which produced in factories, or not. The passage makes the point that general public would not be satisfied if the cost of electricity would be increased. On the contrary, the professor mentioned that the cost would be increased about 1 percent. In fact, people would like to pay this money for having the cleaner environment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 63, Rule ID: THE_NN_AND_THE_NN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'are'?
Suggestion: are
...n between the article and the professor is whether setting new rules increasing th...
^^
Line 7, column 198, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...r not. The passage makes the point that general public would not be satisfied if the cost of e...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, nonetheless, so, therefore, for instance, in contrast, in fact, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1546.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 291.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31271477663 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13022058845 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75620227136 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553264604811 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 463.5 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.3103014428 49.2860985944 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.625 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1875 21.698381199 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.875 7.06452816374 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.408106227681 0.272083759551 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.122170254738 0.0996497079465 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.094934163164 0.0662205650399 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.231145051754 0.162205337803 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0561696666526 0.0443174109184 127% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.3589403974 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.92 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 63.6247240618 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.