Average carbon emissions per person, 1967-2007

The line graph delineates the amount of greenhouse gasses emitted per person in 4 countries, namely the UK, Sweden, Italy, Portugal, measured in metric tonnes, from 1967 to 2007.
Overall, there was a downward trajectory observed in the figure for the UK and Sweden. While the reverse was true for Italy and Portugal’s carbon emission. In addition, the UK had by far the highest figure throughout the period.
The number of the UK’s CO2 emissions started at about 11% in 1967, after which it witnessed a continuous decrease before reached at over 8% in 2007. The data for the exhausted fumes emissions per person in Portugal saw opposite changes, starting at over 1% in 1967, increasing relentlessly to about 6% in 2007. Similar to that of Portugal, the exhausted fumes emissions in Italy started in 1967, started at north of 4% in 1967, consistently increasing before reaching at around 8% in 2007.
For that of Sweden, it started at an upward of 8% in 1967 then declined to shy of 6%, despite an increase to just over 10% in 1977.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"the amount of greenhouse gasses emitted per person" -> "the per capita emissions of greenhouse gases"
Explanation: "Per capita emissions" is a more precise and formal term that clearly indicates the measurement per individual, while "greenhouse gases" is the correct spelling of the term.
"there was a downward trajectory observed in the figure" -> "a downward trend was observed in the data"
Explanation: "Downward trend" is a more standard phrase in academic writing, and "data" is a more appropriate term than "figure" in this context.
"the reverse was true for Italy and Portugal’s carbon emission" -> "the opposite trend was evident for carbon emissions in Italy and Portugal"
Explanation: "Opposite trend" is clearer and more formal than "reverse was true," and "carbon emissions" is more precise than "carbon emission."
"had by far the highest figure throughout the period" -> "exhibited the highest emissions throughout the period"
Explanation: "Exhibited the highest emissions" is more formal and specific than "had by far the highest figure," which is vague.
"started at about 11% in 1967, after which it witnessed a continuous decrease before reached at over 8% in 2007" -> "began at approximately 11% in 1967, followed by a continuous decrease, ultimately reaching over 8% in 2007"
Explanation: "Began" is more formal than "started," "approximately" is more precise than "about," and "ultimately reaching" improves clarity and grammatical correctness.
"the data for the exhausted fumes emissions per person in Portugal saw opposite changes" -> "the data for per capita emissions of exhaust fumes in Portugal exhibited an opposite trend"
Explanation: "Exhibited an opposite trend" is more formal and precise than "saw opposite changes," and "per capita emissions of exhaust fumes" is clearer.
"started at north of 4% in 1967, consistently increasing before reaching at around 8% in 2007" -> "began at over 4% in 1967, consistently increasing to approximately 8% in 2007"
Explanation: "Began at over 4%" is clearer than "started at north of 4%," and "to approximately" is more precise than "reaching at around."
"For that of Sweden, it started at an upward of 8% in 1967 then declined to shy of 6%" -> "In Sweden, emissions began at over 8% in 1967 and subsequently declined to just below 6%"
Explanation: "In Sweden" is more concise than "For that of Sweden," and "subsequently declined to just below" is clearer and more formal than "then declined to shy of."
"despite an increase to just over 10% in 1977" -> "despite a rise to just above 10% in 1977"
Explanation: "Rise" is a more formal term than "increase," and "just above" is more precise than "just over."

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5

Explanation: The essay generally addresses the task, but the format is inappropriate in places. The essay does not provide a clear overview of the main trends in the data. Instead, it recounts details mechanically, with no clear overview. The essay also presents, but inadequately covers, key features/bullet points. There is a tendency to focus on details rather than the overall trends.

How to improve: The essay could be improved by providing a clear overview of the main trends in the data. For example, the essay could state that the UK and Sweden saw a decrease in carbon emissions per person, while Italy and Portugal saw an increase. The essay could also highlight the key features of the data, such as the fact that the UK had the highest carbon emissions per person throughout the period. The essay should also avoid focusing on details and instead focus on the overall trends in the data.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0

Explanation: The essay presents information with some organization, but there is a noticeable lack of overall progression. While it attempts to describe trends in carbon emissions, the structure is somewhat disjointed. The use of cohesive devices is inadequate, leading to a repetitive and unclear narrative. For instance, phrases like "the data for the exhausted fumes emissions" are awkward and may confuse the reader. Additionally, the paragraphing is not consistently logical, as some ideas could be better grouped together for clarity.

How to improve: To enhance coherence and cohesion, the writer should focus on improving the logical flow of ideas. This can be achieved by using a wider range of cohesive devices appropriately and ensuring that each paragraph has a clear central topic. Additionally, avoiding repetitive phrases and ensuring that the information is presented in a more structured manner will help the reader follow the argument more easily. Lastly, refining the use of paragraphing to group related ideas will contribute to a clearer overall progression in the essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary relevant to the task. It uses terms like "greenhouse gasses," "downward trajectory," and "carbon emissions," which are appropriate for the context. However, there are instances of awkward phrasing and inaccuracies in word choice, such as "the number of the UK’s CO2 emissions started at about 11%," which should refer to metric tonnes rather than a percentage. Additionally, the phrase "exhausted fumes emissions" is not commonly used and may confuse readers. While the essay attempts to use less common vocabulary, the inaccuracies and occasional errors in spelling and word formation prevent it from achieving a higher score.

How to improve: To enhance the lexical resource, the writer should focus on using more precise and appropriate vocabulary. Avoiding awkward phrases and ensuring clarity in word choice will improve the overall quality. Additionally, incorporating a wider range of synonyms and expressions related to the topic can help convey meanings more effectively. Proofreading for spelling and grammatical errors will also contribute to a clearer presentation of ideas.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation: The essay demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, which is characteristic of a Band 6. There are some grammatical errors, such as "before reached at over 8%" and "started at north of 4%," which detract from the overall clarity. However, these errors do not significantly impede communication. The essay shows an understanding of the data presented in the graph, but the sentence structures could be more varied and accurate to achieve a higher band score.

How to improve: To enhance the grammatical range and accuracy, the writer should focus on the following:

Variety in Sentence Structures: Incorporate a wider range of complex sentences and ensure that they are used accurately.
Error Correction: Pay attention to common grammatical errors and revise sentences for clarity. For example, "before reaching over 8%" instead of "before reached at over 8%."
Punctuation: Ensure correct use of punctuation to improve the flow of sentences and enhance readability.
Clarity in Data Presentation: Use clearer expressions when describing data trends, such as "the emissions decreased steadily" instead of "witnessed a continuous decrease."

Bài sửa mẫu

The line graph delineates the amount of greenhouse gases emitted per person in four countries, namely the UK, Sweden, Italy, and Portugal, measured in metric tonnes, from 1967 to 2007. Overall, a downward trajectory was observed for the UK and Sweden, while the reverse was true for Italy and Portugal’s carbon emissions. Additionally, the UK had by far the highest figures throughout the period.

The UK’s CO2 emissions started at about 11 metric tonnes per person in 1967, after which it witnessed a continuous decrease, eventually reaching just over 8 metric tonnes in 2007. In contrast, Portugal’s emissions began at over 1 metric tonne in 1967 and increased steadily to about 6 metric tonnes by 2007. Similarly, Italy’s carbon emissions started at just above 4 metric tonnes in 1967 and consistently rose to around 8 metric tonnes in 2007.

For Sweden, emissions began at over 8 metric tonnes in 1967, then declined to just below 6 metric tonnes, despite a temporary increase to just over 10 metric tonnes in 1977.