The pie charts below show electricity generation by source in New Zealand and Germany in 1980 and 2010.
The presented pie charts depict information about how much electricity was generated by different kind of fuel sources classified into coal, petroleum, natural gas, nuclear and hydro power in New Zealand and Germany over a period of two separate years.
At first glance, it is immediately obvious that the major proportion of the electricity was produced by coal in New Zealand throughout the period, whilst in Germany natural gas was the main source for generating electricity in 1981, this figure replaced by nuclear power towards the end of survey. Moreover, there was a significant increase in total production of electricity units.
When observing data in more detail, between these years, electricity generation almost doubled, rising from 127 units to 200 in New Zealand, and from 107 to 214 units in Germany. Coal burning for generating electricity accounted for the most significant proportion of the total production in 1980 with standing at 56 units and this figure almost tripled over the course of 20 years. The share of natural gas was initially as similar as that of hydro power, which was at 30, but while the former plunged by just below 5 units, the latter witnessed a marked rise to reach less than a third of total units.
With regarding to Germany, had experienced an enormous contribution to obtain electricity via nuclear, rising from 20 units in 1980 to nearly 160 in 2010, while the figures for Petroleum in Germany went up slightly from 22 unit in 1980 to roughly one-quarter unit in 2010. Interestingly, the ratio of coal had remained stable in both respective years.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-11 | faraj27 | 73 | view |
| 2019-12-11 | faraj27 | 73 | view |
| 2019-11-25 | Trang Carina | 84 | view |
| 2019-09-30 | noor salah | 67 | view |
| 2019-09-20 | Sơn Joyous | 67 | view |
- The maps below show the centre of a small town called Islip as it is now, and plans for its development. 67
- The table below shows the numbers of visitors to Ashdown Museum during the year before and the year after it was refurbished The charts show the result of surveys asking visitors how satisfied they were with their visit during the same two periods 50
- The chart below compares levels of recycling, as well as some less environmentally friendly forms of waste management, in fifteen European countries. 78
- The graph below shows the number of books read by men and women at Burnaby Public Library from 2011 to 2014. 84
- The graph below shows waste recycling rates in the U.S. from 1960 to 2011 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, moreover, regarding, so, third, while, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 33.7804878049 163% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 3.97073170732 176% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1348.0 965.302439024 140% => OK
No of words: 265.0 196.424390244 135% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08679245283 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03470204552 3.73543355544 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76500019152 2.65546596893 104% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 106.607317073 145% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.584905660377 0.547539520022 107% => OK
syllable_count: 407.7 283.868780488 144% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 33.0 22.4926829268 147% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 76.2381138277 43.030603864 177% => OK
Chars per sentence: 168.5 112.824112599 149% => OK
Words per sentence: 33.125 22.9334400587 144% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.75 5.23603664747 148% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.290988134297 0.215688989381 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.114361789601 0.103423049105 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0851224776705 0.0843802449381 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.182448221711 0.15604864568 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0567519181928 0.0819641961636 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.1 13.2329268293 144% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.44 61.2550243902 76% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.3012195122 146% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 11.4140731707 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.21 8.06136585366 114% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 40.7170731707 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 11.4329268293 175% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.2 10.9970731707 138% => OK
text_standard: 20.0 11.0658536585 181% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.