TPO-41 - Integrated Writing Task
Burning coal in power plants produces a waste product called coal ash, a material that contains small amounts of potentially harmful chemicals Environmentalists in the United States are concerned about the damage such harmful chemicals may be doing to the environment and suggest that the United States government should create new, much stricter regulations for handling and storing coal ash.
However, representatives of power companies take the opposite view; they argue that new regulations are unnecessary and might actually have negative consequences They use the following arguments to support their position.
Regulations Exist
First, power company representatives point out that effective environmental regulations already exist. For example, one very important regulation requires companies to use liner-special material that prevents coal ash components from leaking into the soil and contaminating the surrounding environment. Companies that dispose of coal ash in disposal ponds or landfills must use liner in every new pond or landfill they build.
Concerns About Recycling Coal Ash
Second, some analysts predict that creating very strict rules for storing and handling coal ash might discourage the recycling of coal ash into other products Currently, a large portion of coal ash generated by power plants is recycled: it is used, for example, in building materials such as concrete and bricks Recycling coal ash reduces the need to dispose of it in other ways and presents no environmental danger. However, if new, stricter rules are adopted for handling coal ash, consumers may become concerned that recycled coal ash products are just too dangerous, and may stop buying the products
Increased Cost
Finally, strict new regulations would result in a significant increase in disposal and handling costs for the power companies. perhaps as much as ten times the current costs. Power companies would be forced to increase the price of electricity, which would not be welcomed by the general public.
The reading and lecture both disccused creating new regulations for handing and storing coal ashesh. While the reading believes that it is unnecessary for gorvernment to creat new restrictions, the professor claims that current rules are not sufficient and there should be more restriction on storing and handling coal.
First, the reading claims that there is enough regulation and backs up it's argument by illusterating that companies use linears. On the other hand, professor believes that, this rules are not enough owing to the evidence which companies should only use liner for new land and feilds and support her claim by illustrating the leaking of contaminating materials in water which did so harm to the rurals living there.
Second, the reading suggests that if more regulations are created then concerns about recycling coal ashesh will stem and these may conclude in disuading people from recycling of coal ash in to other materials. nevertheless, the lecturer asserts that the reading didn't get the point and it is not a correct statment. Also, she give the example of Mercury, a hazardous and danger material, that has so many restriction on it but it has been over fifty years that still companies recycles it.
Ultimately, the reading alleged that creating new rules will resualt in a significant increase in costs of disposal and handling for the power companies. While the teacher explains that although it will increase the costs by fifty billion dollers, but it is not a lot of money that each household user will experiance the increased amount of 1 percent that is a subtle change in their payments.
To sum up, although the reading suggests that current rules are sufficient but the teacher will refutes the writer idea by supporting her claims with much elaborated information. And she is sure that some restrication should be added.
- TPO-44 - Integrated Writing TaskIn 1957 a European silver coin dating to the eleventh century was discovered at a Native American archaeological site in the state of Maine in the United States. Many people believed the coin had been originally brought to 80
- TPO-22 - Integrated Writing TaskEthanol fuel, made from plants such as corn and sugar cane, has been advocated by some people as an alternative to gasoline in the United States. However, many critics argue that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoli 80
- tpo 21 76
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?For the successful development of a country, it is more important for a government to spend money on the education of very young children(five to ten years old) than to spend money on universities.Use 90
- TPO 41.Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Teacher were more appreciated and valued by society in the past than they were nowadays.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 211, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Nevertheless
...ling of coal ash in to other materials. nevertheless, the lecturer asserts that the reading ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 263, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
..., the lecturer asserts that the reading didnt get the point and it is not a correct s...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 327, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'she' must be used with a third-person verb: 'gives'.
Suggestion: gives
...it is not a correct statment. Also, she give the example of Mercury, a hazardous and...
^^^^
Line 5, column 97, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'refute'
Suggestion: refute
...les are sufficient but the teacher will refutes the writer idea by supporting her claim...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, nevertheless, second, so, still, then, while, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 7.30242825607 205% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1558.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 306.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09150326797 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18244613648 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72886579569 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.542483660131 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 27.0 21.2450331126 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 64.9812433204 49.2860985944 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.636363636 110.228320801 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.8181818182 21.698381199 128% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.18181818182 7.06452816374 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.329562057629 0.272083759551 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.118928222583 0.0996497079465 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.09398671953 0.0662205650399 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.163202490694 0.162205337803 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0740876578408 0.0443174109184 167% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 13.3589403974 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 53.8541721854 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 11.0289183223 114% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 63.6247240618 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.498013245 122% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => 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.