The charts show the sources of electricity produced in 4 countries between 2003 and 2008.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The pie charts below give information about the electricity produced in 4 countries in the five-year period (from 2003 to 2008).

It is noticeable that Morocco and Viet Nam only consisted of 2 types of electricity (without the production of nuclear power), while India and Sweden's pie charts were divided into 3 sections, including hydro power, fossil fuels, and nuclear power.

Between 2003 and 2008, fossil fuel accounted for over four-fifths of the pie, making it the most popular source of electricity in India. Concurrently, Viet Nam also had fossil fuel as the majority of electricity used comprised approximately half. Conversely, Morocco and Sweden’s fossil fuel took up the least percentage of the pie chart, only 4% and 5%, respectively.

In 5 years, hydro power in Morocco consisted of 95% of the total pie, 19 times as much as the remaining 5% of fossil fuel. At the same time, hydro power also accounted for a big proportion in Viet Nam and Sweden. It was the largest quantity of electricity in Sweden and included almost two-fifths in Viet Nam. In contrast, hydro power was the least popular electricity used in India.

During 5 years from 2003 to 2008, nuclear power only existed in India and Sweden. Nuclear power in Sweden made up a bigger proportion of the pie chart than in India. While only 4% was recorded in India, Sweden’s nuclear power consisted of nearly half (44%), 11 times as much as that of India.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"It is noticeable" -> "It is evident"
Explanation: "It is noticeable" is a common phrase, but "It is evident" is a more sophisticated alternative that maintains the same meaning and enhances the formality of the sentence.
"consisted of 2 types of electricity" -> "comprised two types of electricity"
Explanation: "Comprised" is a more formal and precise verb choice when describing the components of something.
"making it the most popular source of electricity" -> "rendering it the predominant source of electricity"
Explanation: "Predominant" is a more advanced synonym for "most popular," adding nuance and sophistication to the sentence.
"Concurrently" -> "Similarly"
Explanation: "Concurrently" implies actions happening simultaneously, while "Similarly" better fits the context of comparing two situations.
"took up the least percentage" -> "occupied the smallest percentage"
Explanation: "Occupied" is a more precise verb choice for describing the portion of a pie chart, conveying the idea more effectively.
"In 5 years" -> "Over the span of 5 years"
Explanation: "Over the span of" adds clarity and formality to the expression of time.
"19 times as much as" -> "nineteenfold compared to"
Explanation: "Nineteenfold compared to" is a more precise and formal way to express the concept of being nineteen times larger.
"quantity of electricity" -> "volume of electricity"
Explanation: "Volume" is a more sophisticated term when referring to the amount or quantity of something.
"consisted of nearly half" -> "accounted for almost half"
Explanation: "Accounted for" is a more precise and formal phrase for describing the proportion of something.
"11 times as much as" -> "elevenfold compared to"
Explanation: Similar to point 7, "elevenfold compared to" is a more precise and formal way to express the concept of being eleven times larger.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7.0

Explanation:
The essay effectively covers the requirements of the task by summarizing the main features of the data presented in the pie charts for the four countries between 2003 and 2008. It provides clear overviews of the main trends in electricity production and makes relevant comparisons where necessary. Key features such as the dominant sources of electricity in each country, the variations in the proportions of different energy sources, and the changes over the five-year period are adequately highlighted and presented.

How to improve:
To improve, the essay could provide more detailed and extended analysis of the data, especially in discussing the significance of the trends observed. Additionally, ensuring a smoother flow between sentences and paragraphs would enhance coherence and cohesion in the essay.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7

Explanation: The essay logically organizes information and ideas with clear progression throughout. It effectively uses a range of cohesive devices, such as transitional phrases ("between 2003 and 2008," "conversely," "in contrast") to connect ideas. Each paragraph presents a clear central topic related to the sources of electricity in the countries mentioned. The essay is structured in a coherent manner, and the sequencing of information is logical, aiding in the reader’s understanding.

How to improve: To further improve coherence and cohesion, consider incorporating more varied cohesive devices to enhance the flow of ideas even more smoothly. Additionally, ensure consistent paragraphing throughout the essay to maintain logical organization and coherence.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 7

Band Score: 7

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a satisfactory range of vocabulary, allowing for flexibility and precision in conveying ideas. There is a commendable attempt to use less common vocabulary, such as "comprised," "proportion," and "accounted for," which contributes to the overall lexical resource. The writer also displays awareness of style and collocation, evident in phrases like "consisted of" and "accounted for." However, there are some instances of errors in word choice and collocation, such as "only consisted of" and "the most popular source of electricity in India," which could be improved for clarity and accuracy. Additionally, occasional errors in spelling and word formation, such as "Viet Nam" instead of "Vietnam," slightly detract from the overall lexical quality.

How to improve:
To improve lexical resource, strive for more precise word choice and accurate collocation. Review the essay for consistency in spelling and ensure correct formation of words. Additionally, consider incorporating a wider variety of vocabulary to further enhance lexical range and sophistication.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation:
The essay uses a mix of simple and complex sentence forms to convey information about the sources of electricity in four countries from 2003 to 2008. There are some instances of minor errors in grammar and punctuation, but these errors rarely reduce communication.

How to improve:
To improve the grammatical range and accuracy score:

Increase the variety of sentence structures used.
Pay closer attention to subject-verb agreement and the use of articles.
Ensure consistency in punctuation, particularly with comma usage and sentence boundaries.

Let me know if you need further assistance with this or any other questions!

Bài sửa mẫu

The provided pie charts delineate the sources of electricity generation in four nations over the span of five years, from 2003 to 2008.

Upon initial examination, it is evident that Morocco and Viet Nam exhibited a simplified energy production profile, lacking nuclear power, while India and Sweden showcased a more diversified energy mix, encompassing hydro power, fossil fuels, and nuclear power.

Between 2003 and 2008, fossil fuel dominated the energy landscape in India and Viet Nam, constituting the majority share, with India relying on it for over four-fifths of its electricity and Viet Nam for approximately half. Conversely, fossil fuels played a minor role in Morocco and Sweden, accounting for only 4% and 5% of their respective energy outputs.

During this period, hydro power emerged as the predominant energy source in Morocco, representing 95% of its total electricity generation, overshadowing fossil fuels by a significant margin. Similarly, hydro power held considerable sway in Viet Nam and Sweden, constituting the largest portion of electricity generation in Sweden and nearly two-fifths in Viet Nam. In stark contrast, hydro power was the least favored option in India.

Over the five-year period, nuclear power was exclusive to India and Sweden. Sweden surpassed India in nuclear energy production, with nuclear power contributing 44% to its energy output, compared to a mere 4% in India.