The chart below shows the water levels of 6 cities in Australia in October 2009 and 2010.
The bar chart illustrates the variations in water levels across six Australian cities during October 2009 and 2010.
Overall, the majority of cities witnessed an upward trend in water levels in reservoirs in October 2009. Besides, the only two exceptions were Darwin where the water level decreased significantly and Brisbane recorded no substantial change in this period.
In October 2009, Sydney and Canberra were the two cities that had the largest amount of water in reserve, with nearly 80%. Following that, the figure for the water level in Brisbane was at around 55% and twice as much as Melbourne, at 22%. Additionally, Darwin recorded a significant percentage of water with 43%.
In the next year, Perth witnessed an upward trend with the highest increase in the level of water in reservoirs. Having a similar trend, Canberra also saw a substantial amount of water reservoirs that reached a peak of nearly 100% and became the most abundant water reserve in this period. Although Sydney and Melbourne saw a slight increase, there was no considerable change. Finally, Brisbane remained stable at 55% while Darwin decreased significantly with a figure of 25% and to be the lowest position of six cities in reserving water in Australia.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-26 | tieuquynh | 84 | view |
| 2023-08-10 | Anne020304 | 73 | view |
| 2023-08-10 | Anne020304 | 11 | view |
| 2023-08-10 | Anne020304 | 73 | view |
| 2023-08-06 | wwwdung | 78 | view |
- The chart below shows the percentage of the day working adults spent doing different activities in a particular country in 1958 and in 2008 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The chart below shows the percentage of the day working adults spent doing different activities in a particular country in 1958 and in 2008 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
- The graphs below show the development of Brindell from 1800 to 2000 Summarize the key features and make comparisons where relevant 11
- Young people are committing more crimes Discuss the causes and solutions for this problem 73
- The graphs below show the development of Brindell from 1800 to 2000 Summarize the key features and make comparisons where relevant 11
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, finally, if, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 33.7804878049 98% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1060.0 965.302439024 110% => OK
No of words: 203.0 196.424390244 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.22167487685 4.92477711251 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.77462671648 3.73543355544 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74250217113 2.65546596893 103% => OK
Unique words: 108.0 106.607317073 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.532019704433 0.547539520022 97% => OK
syllable_count: 318.6 283.868780488 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.7213997256 43.030603864 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.0 112.824112599 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3 22.9334400587 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.7 5.23603664747 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.339576014457 0.215688989381 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.143362493493 0.103423049105 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.122639575179 0.0843802449381 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.252489771776 0.15604864568 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.106332196048 0.0819641961636 130% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.2329268293 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 61.2550243902 84% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 11.4140731707 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.13 8.06136585366 101% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 40.7170731707 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => 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.