TPO 42
The professor explains three clear arguments opposing the points stated in the reading passage about the negative consequences of new regulations for handling and storing hazardous coal ash which are concerned by power companies representatives and attorneys.
First, the professor argues that exist and current regulations are not sufficient because only new landfills are obliged to use liner in order to prevent coal ash contaminates environments. She states that older site damage ecosystem and environment by emitting harmful components of coal ash which leaks into ground water and jeopardize peoples' health. Therefore, she repudiate this concern.
Second, the reading passage states that creating very strict laws and rules for handling and storing coal ash might have negative impact on consumer passion and motivation in buying products which manufactured by recycled coal ash. Nevertheless, the professor argues against this affirmation, and claims that setting strict rules won't mean stop using coal ash recycled products, in fact, it would trigger consumers to continuously buying it. She referred to experience of storing and handling Mercury with very strict rules and regulations which didn't have any negative impact on consumers' purchase intention of Mercury recycled products.
Third and last, the reading passage asserts that new strict regulations would cause extra cost to power companies so that they need to expense more in disposing and handling coal ashes and it may increase price of electricity. In contrast, the professor disproves the idea due to the fact that it will cost 50 billion dollars which seems a huge money, but in fact, it is well worthy to apply because the average cost for every electricity member will enhance only one percent and people will never consider it as significant issue.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-06 | Hrushikesh_Vaddoriya | 60 | view |
| 2022-08-21 | mmorteza | 80 | view |
| 2022-08-21 | mmorteza | 80 | view |
| 2021-11-14 | lutzuming | 80 | view |
| 2021-10-24 | Pariakarimi | 80 | view |
- Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific theories presented in the reading passage 80
- Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on specific points made in the reading passage. 3
- TPO 17 Integrated 85
- Some people believe that university students should be required to attend classes Others believe that going to classes should be optional for students Which point of view do you agree with Use specific reasons and details to explain your answer 85
- TPO 24 Integrated 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 370, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'she' must be used with a third-person verb: 'repudiates'.
Suggestion: repudiates
...opardize peoples health. Therefore, she repudiate this concern. Second, the reading pa...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 547, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...very strict rules and regulations which didnt have any negative impact on consumers p...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, may, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, third, well, in contrast, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 10.4613686534 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 7.30242825607 219% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1552.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 284.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.46478873239 5.08290768461 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73687377856 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 145.348785872 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.577464788732 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 469.8 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 31.0 21.2450331126 146% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 69.7137002317 49.2860985944 141% => OK
Chars per sentence: 172.444444444 110.228320801 156% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.5555555556 21.698381199 145% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.1111111111 7.06452816374 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
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: 0.0557727760577 0.272083759551 20% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0251555447566 0.0996497079465 25% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0121671463211 0.0662205650399 18% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0351505902025 0.162205337803 22% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0157106370442 0.0443174109184 35% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.1 13.3589403974 150% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.55 53.8541721854 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 11.0289183223 151% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.98 12.2367328918 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.51 8.42419426049 113% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 63.6247240618 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 10.498013245 137% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.