The reading and the lecture are both about coal ash and its potential damage to our environment. The author of the reading feels that new regulations are unnecessary and might actually have negative consequences. The lecturer challenges the claims made by the author. He is of the opinion that current rules are not sufficient and there should be stricter rules.
To begin with, the author argues that power company representatives point out that effective environmental regulations already exist. The article mentions that one necessary regulation requires companies to use liner, which is a special material that averts coal ash components from leaking into the soil and polluting the surrounding environment. Moreover, companies must use liner in every pond or landfill they build. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that liner is not sufficient for preventing coal ash components from leaking into soil and groundwater. Additionally, he gives examples of how coal ash has caused significant damage.It leaked into groundwater and it contaminated fresh water.
Secondly, the writer suggests if stricter rules are adopted for handling coal ash, consumers may become concerned that recycled coal ash products are too hazardous and for this reason they may stop buying them. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by mentioning usage and recycling of Mercury, which is fairly dangerous. He elaborates on this by bringing up the point that people recycle it and use it without fear.
Finally, the author posits that all these regulations will result in a significant increase in disposal and handling costs for companies.Moreover, it is stated in the article that it will not be welcomed by general public. In contrast, the lecturer’s position is the increase in the costs is worthwhile.He notes that the consumers household electricity bill will increase by only 1 percent and it is not a big price for having a clean environment.
- TPO 28 integrated writing Peary s trip to the North Pole 80
- franchising 76
- 33 People who develop many different skills are more successful than people who focus on one skill only 60
- TPO 28 Integrated Writing Task 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement People who have learned many different skills are more likely to succeed than those who focus on learning only one skill 60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 214, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ht actually have negative consequences. The lecturer challenges the claims made by ...
^^^
Line 3, column 668, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: It
... coal ash has caused significant damage.It leaked into groundwater and it contamin...
^^
Line 7, column 138, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Moreover
...sposal and handling costs for companies.Moreover, it is stated in the article that it wi...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 208, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...article that it will not be welcomed by general public. In contrast, the lecturer's posit...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 309, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: He
...the increase in the costs is worthwhile.He notes that the consumers household elec...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, finally, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, while, in contrast, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 22.412803532 152% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1659.0 1373.03311258 121% => OK
No of words: 310.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35161290323 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05363262631 2.5805825403 118% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 145.348785872 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.564516129032 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 513.0 419.366225166 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.5762940294 49.2860985944 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.6 110.228320801 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6666666667 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.13333333333 7.06452816374 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.543771693139 0.272083759551 200% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.151012037679 0.0996497079465 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.114991525321 0.0662205650399 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.280292035542 0.162205337803 173% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.103623620802 0.0443174109184 234% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 53.8541721854 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.75 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.37 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 63.6247240618 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.