The chart shows the proportion of renewable energy in total energy supply in 4 countries from 1997 to 2010. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. Write at least 150 words.

The chart illustrates the percentage of alternative energy in the total of energy provided in 4 sectors during the period 1997 to 2010.

Overall, renewable energy was provided mostly in Iceland, next was Turkey and the lowest proportion in Australia and Sweden.

For Iceland, the source of renewable energy increased rapidly over the years, with around 45% in 1997 to 70% in 2010. With regard to Turkey, the percentage of alternative energy was relatively high, however, it only accounted for a half of Iceland. In 1997, this country accounted for nearly 38% and the proportion increased slightly to exactly 40%, however, the rate decreased to around 35% in 2010.

Finally, the percentage of renewable energy in Australia and Sweden was not very different, the proportion of these 2 countries was the same. For Australia, the quantity of alternative energy reduced to under 10% in 2010 while the proportion of renewable energy in Sweden increased a little to nearly 10% in 2010, it is equal to the percentage of Australia in 1997.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"alternative energy" -> "renewable energy"
Explanation: "Renewable energy" is a more accurate and commonly used term to describe energy sources such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric power, as opposed to "alternative energy," which can encompass non-renewable sources like nuclear energy.
"the lowest proportion in" -> "the lowest proportion was observed in"
Explanation: "Was observed in" adds clarity and formality to the sentence, indicating that the lowest proportion was identified in specific locations.
"For Iceland" -> "In Iceland"
Explanation: "In Iceland" clarifies the location being discussed and makes the sentence more concise.
"the source of renewable energy" -> "the share of renewable energy"
Explanation: "Share of renewable energy" accurately reflects the percentage of energy provided by renewable sources rather than referring to the source itself.
"around 45%" -> "approximately 45%"
Explanation: "Approximately" is more precise than "around," especially in formal writing where accuracy is valued.
"a half of" -> "half that of"
Explanation: "Half that of" is a more concise and formal way to compare proportions.
"In 1997, this country accounted for" -> "In 1997, it accounted for"
Explanation: Removing "this country" reduces redundancy, making the sentence more concise.
"increased slightly to exactly 40%" -> "increased marginally to 40%"
Explanation: "Marginally" is a more precise term to indicate a small increase.
"the rate decreased to around 35%" -> "the rate declined to approximately 35%"
Explanation: "Declined" is a more formal synonym for "decreased," and "approximately" enhances precision.
"the percentage of renewable energy in Australia and Sweden was not very different" -> "the disparity in the percentage of renewable energy between Australia and Sweden was minimal"
Explanation: "Disparity" emphasizes the slight difference more effectively than "not very different," and "minimal" adds precision.
"the proportion of these 2 countries was the same" -> "the proportions in these two countries were identical"
Explanation: Using "proportions" instead of "proportion" maintains grammatical correctness, and "identical" is a more precise term than "the same."
"quantity of alternative energy reduced to under 10%" -> "proportion of renewable energy decreased to less than 10%"
Explanation: "Proportion of renewable energy" accurately reflects the decrease in the percentage provided by renewable sources.
"renewable energy in Sweden increased a little to nearly 10%" -> "renewable energy in Sweden saw a slight increase to nearly 10%"
Explanation: Adding "saw" enhances clarity and indicates that the increase was observed.
"it is equal to the percentage of Australia in 1997" -> "it equaled the percentage of Australia in 1997"
Explanation: "Equaled" is the correct past tense of "equal" in this context.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

[
Band Score: 6.0
Explanation:
The essay adequately addresses the requirements of the task by summarizing the main features of the chart and making relevant comparisons between the four countries over the given period. It presents an overview of the proportion of renewable energy in total energy supply from 1997 to 2010 for Iceland, Turkey, Australia, and Sweden. Key features such as the trends in renewable energy usage for each country are highlighted and compared. However, some details may be inaccurate or irrelevant, such as stating that Turkey’s renewable energy proportion in 2010 was exactly 40%, which might not be precisely accurate based on the provided data.
How to improve:
To enhance the response, ensure accuracy and precision in reporting the data. Avoid making assumptions or providing details that are not explicitly supported by the given information. Additionally, strive for more clarity and conciseness in presenting the main features and comparisons, focusing on relevant trends without unnecessary elaboration or repetition.
]

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 5

Band Score: 5.0

Explanation: The essay presents the main features of the chart and makes comparisons between the countries’ proportions of renewable energy over the given period. The overall organization is somewhat clear, with an introduction and separate paragraphs for each country. However, there are some issues with coherence and cohesion. The essay lacks overall progression as the information seems randomly presented at times. Additionally, there is an overuse of repetitive phrases, such as "percentage of renewable energy," which affects the flow of the essay. While paragraphing is attempted, it is not consistently logical.

How to improve: To improve coherence and cohesion, focus on providing a clearer structure to the essay. Ensure that each paragraph has a clear topic sentence and follows a logical progression of ideas. Avoid repetitive phrases by using synonyms or restructuring sentences. Pay attention to the logical flow between sentences and paragraphs, and consider using cohesive devices more effectively to connect ideas and maintain coherence throughout the essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates an adequate range of vocabulary for the task, covering the essential aspects of the data presented. It utilizes terms such as "proportion," "renewable energy," "total energy supply," and "alternative energy" appropriately. Additionally, there is an attempt to vary the vocabulary with phrases like "source of renewable energy," "percentage of alternative energy," and "quantity of alternative energy," although some repetition occurs. However, there are instances of inaccurate word choice and awkward phrasing, such as "the source of renewable energy increased rapidly over the years" and "the quantity of alternative energy reduced." These inaccuracies slightly impede the clarity and precision of the message. Spelling and word formation errors are noticeable but do not significantly obstruct communication.

How to improve:
To enhance the lexical resource, strive for more varied vocabulary and precise word choices. Use synonyms and alternative expressions to avoid repetition. Proofreading carefully to correct errors in word choice, spelling, and word formation will help to improve the clarity and accuracy of the essay. Additionally, expanding the range of less common vocabulary and using it accurately will elevate the lexical sophistication of the writing.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, with attempts made at complex structures such as subordinate clauses. There are instances of accurate grammar and punctuation, but there are also noticeable errors that occasionally affect communication. For example, there are errors in subject-verb agreement ("the source of renewable energy increased rapidly"), awkward phrasing ("the lowest proportion in Australia and Sweden"), and inconsistent tense usage ("the percentage of renewable energy in Australia and Sweden was not very different"). Despite these errors, the essay generally conveys the main features of the chart and makes relevant comparisons.

How to improve:
To improve the grammatical range and accuracy, focus on enhancing sentence structures by incorporating more complex constructions consistently throughout the essay. Pay close attention to subject-verb agreement, tense consistency, and phrasing to minimize errors that can impact clarity and coherence. Additionally, thorough proofreading and editing can help identify and correct grammatical mistakes before submission.

Bài sửa mẫu

The provided chart delineates the proportion of renewable energy within the total energy supply across four nations from 1997 to 2010.

Broadly, Iceland exhibited the highest reliance on renewable energy, followed by Turkey, with Australia and Sweden demonstrating the lowest percentages.

In Iceland, the utilization of renewable energy surged significantly over the period, escalating from approximately 45% in 1997 to around 70% in 2010. Turkey, meanwhile, sustained a relatively elevated proportion of alternative energy, albeit inferior to Iceland’s. In 1997, Turkey accounted for nearly 38%, which marginally increased to precisely 40% by 2010, though this figure declined to roughly 35% during the same period.

Conversely, both Australia and Sweden presented comparable proportions of renewable energy. Australia experienced a decline, plummeting to under 10% by 2010, whereas Sweden witnessed a slight augmentation, reaching nearly 10% in 2010, equivalent to Australia’s 1997 percentage.