The graph below shows average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person in the United Kingdom, Sweden, Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.

The graph below shows average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person in the United Kingdom, Sweden, Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.

The graph gives information about the average amount of per-person CO2 emissions in four nations from 1967 and 2007.
Overall, the figures for Italy and Portugal showed an upward trend, whereas those for the United Kingdom and Sweden experienced plunges throughout the given period.
As is evident from the graph, the volume of CO2 emissions in Italy stood at the second lowest position at the beginning of the duration with the record of around 4 metric tonnes. In 1990, the figure in Italy surpassed that in Sweden, which then plateaued at nearly 8 metric tonnes, making it the second largest nation to emit CO2. Simultaneously, Portugal saw the least CO2 release during the phase, albeit its moderate climb from 1 to 5.
Turning to the United Kingdom, its figures consistently stood at the top position for the whole 40-year period, although it experienced a gradual decrease from 11 to 9 metric tonnes. The amount of carbon dioxide release in Sweden was documented to peak at 11 metric tonnes in 1977, which then underwent plummet to 5 metric tonnes in 2007, whose figure intersected with that in Portugal in the same year.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

"amount of per-person CO2 emissions" -> "per capita CO2 emissions"
Explanation: "Per capita" is a more concise and commonly used term in academic and scientific contexts to denote "per person," providing a more precise description of individual emissions.
"plunges throughout the given period" -> "declined steadily over the given period"
Explanation: "Plunges" may imply sudden and dramatic drops, whereas "declined steadily" better reflects a gradual decrease over time, which is more accurately depicted in the graph.
"As is evident from the graph" -> "As depicted in the graph"
Explanation: "As depicted in the graph" maintains clarity and avoids redundancy, as the following sentence explicitly discusses the graph’s information.
"stood at the second lowest position" -> "ranked second lowest"
Explanation: "Ranked second lowest" is a more concise and direct way to convey the relative position, improving readability without sacrificing clarity.
"plateaued" -> "remained relatively constant"
Explanation: "Plateaued" implies a sudden and sustained leveling off, whereas "remained relatively constant" accurately describes a period of stability in emissions over time.
"peak at 11 metric tonnes" -> "peaked at 11 metric tonnes"
Explanation: Adding "ed" to "peak" makes the verb past tense, aligning it grammatically with the context of the sentence.
"underwent plummet to" -> "plummeted to"
Explanation: "Plummeted" is the correct verb form to describe a sudden and steep decline, providing a more accurate portrayal of the decrease in CO2 emissions in Sweden.

Band điểm Task Achivement ước lượng: 6

[
Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay adequately addresses the task by summarizing the main features of the graph and making relevant comparisons between the countries. It presents an overview of the trends in CO2 emissions for each country over the given period. Key features such as initial levels, trends, and comparisons between nations are highlighted. However, the details provided could be more relevant and accurate in some instances, and the extension of ideas could be more thorough.
How to improve: To improve, the essay could provide more precise and accurate data points, avoiding vague language like "moderate climb" or "plunges." Additionally, ensuring that the comparisons made between countries are clear and well-supported by the data would enhance the response. Further development and expansion of ideas could strengthen the essay’s overall coherence and effectiveness.
]

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay arranges information and ideas coherently, with a clear overall progression from an introduction to discussing each country’s CO2 emissions. It uses cohesive devices effectively to connect sentences and ideas, although there are some instances of faulty cohesion, such as awkward phrasing or unclear connections. The essay does use paragraphing, but it’s not always logically organized, as some ideas could be better grouped together for clarity.
How to improve: To improve coherence and cohesion, focus on refining sentence structures to ensure smoother transitions between ideas. Additionally, consider revising the paragraphing to ensure each paragraph addresses a single main point or aspect, enhancing the logical flow of the essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0
Explanation: The essay employs an adequate range of vocabulary, covering basic terminology related to carbon dioxide emissions and numerical descriptions. There is an attempt to introduce less common vocabulary, such as "plunges" and "plateaued," although with some inaccuracy and occasional awkward phrasing. Some errors in word choice and collocation are present, such as "stood at the top position" instead of "held the top position." However, these errors do not significantly impede communication.
How to improve: To enhance lexical resource, strive for greater precision and variety in word choice. Use complex vocabulary more accurately and ensure that collocations are appropriate. Proofread for errors in word choice and phrasing to improve clarity and coherence. Additionally, aim to incorporate more sophisticated lexical features to elevate the overall quality of expression.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 6

Band Score: 6.0

Explanation:
The essay demonstrates a mix of simple and complex sentence forms, utilizing a variety of structures to convey information. There is an attempt at complex sentences, though some inaccuracies and awkward phrasings are present. The essay maintains coherence and clarity in conveying the main features of the graph, despite occasional errors.

How to improve:
To enhance the grammatical range and accuracy, focus on refining complex sentence structures for clearer expression. Review and revise sentences where errors occur to ensure better precision and fluency. Additionally, pay attention to punctuation to further enhance clarity and coherence.

Bài sửa mẫu

The provided graph illustrates the average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per person in the United Kingdom, Sweden, Italy, and Portugal from 1967 to 2007. Throughout the period under consideration, Italy and Portugal experienced an upward trajectory in CO2 emissions, while the United Kingdom and Sweden witnessed declines.

Italy commenced the period with CO2 emissions hovering around 4 metric tonnes per person, marking it as the second lowest among the four nations. By 1990, Italy’s emissions surpassed those of Sweden, peaking at nearly 8 metric tonnes. Meanwhile, Portugal exhibited the lowest CO2 emissions, albeit with a moderate increase from 1 to 5 metric tonnes.

In contrast, the United Kingdom consistently maintained the highest CO2 emissions over the entire 40-year duration. Despite starting at 11 metric tonnes in 1967, the UK’s emissions gradually decreased to 9 metric tonnes by 2007.

Sweden’s CO2 emissions peaked at 11 metric tonnes in 1977 before sharply declining to 5 metric tonnes by 2007. Notably, Sweden’s emissions intersected with Portugal’s in 2007, reflecting a convergence in their respective emissions trends.