11
Task-1
Let's Learn from Others' Mistakes
Common Errors
1
Source: Ms Ramanpreet Kaur 17-07-23 Day 12
Original Text
The provided to charts depicts the different elements and renewable sources which are used to generate electricity in Germany and France in 2009.
Corrected
Corrected version:
The provided two charts depict the different elements and renewable sources used to generate electricity in Germany and France in 2009.
Explanation:
"to" should be replaced with "two" to indicate the correct number of charts.
Improved
Improved version:
The provided two charts depict the different elements and renewable sources used to generate electricity in Germany and France in 2009.
2
Original Text
Overall, it is clearly evident that in Germany, the highest proportion of conventional thermal was used from all type of sources while in France highest percentage was nuclear power.
Corrected
Corrected version:
Overall, it is clearly evident that in Germany, the highest proportion of conventional thermal power was used among all types of sources, while in France, the highest percentage was nuclear power.
Explanation:
"thermal" should be followed by "power" to clarify that it refers to the generation of electricity.
"from all type of sources" should be changed to "among all types of sources" for clarity.
"in France highest percentage" should be corrected to "in France, the highest percentage" to include the necessary punctuation.
Improved
Improved version:
Overall, it is evident that Germany predominantly relied on conventional thermal power, while France had the highest percentage of nuclear power.
3
Original Text
Moving with the former pie chart, 59.9% of conventional thermal was used to produce electricity which was the doubled of nuclear and renewable source 23.0% and 17.4% respectively.
Corrected
Corrected version:
Moving to the former pie chart, 59.9% of conventional thermal power was used to produce electricity, which was double the amount of nuclear power (23.0%) and renewable sources (17.4%) respectively.
Explanation:
"with" should be changed to "to" for clarity.
"the doubled of nuclear and renewable source 23.0% and 17.4% respectively" should be corrected to "double the amount of nuclear power (23.0%) and renewable sources (17.4%) respectively" to provide clarity and proper comparison.
Improved
Improved version:
Moving to the former pie chart, conventional thermal power accounted for 59.9% of electricity generation, double the percentage of nuclear and renewable sources at 23.0% and 17.4% respectively.
4
Original Text
In terms of renewable, the figure for biomass and wind was much more higher comparative to the hydroelectric. Moreover, very fewer percentage of solar was added to make the electricity (6.1%).
Corrected
Corrected version:
In terms of renewables, the figure for biomass and wind was much higher compared to hydroelectric power. Moreover, a much lower percentage of solar energy (6.1%) was used to generate electricity.
Explanation:
"the" should be removed before "hydroelectric" to indicate that biomass and wind are higher compared to hydroelectric power.
"very fewer percentage of solar" should be changed to "a much lower percentage of solar energy" to provide proper comparison.
"make the electricity" should be replaced with "generate electricity" for clarity.
Improved
Improved version:
Regarding renewables, biomass and wind power had significantly higher shares compared to hydroelectric power. However, solar power made a relatively small contribution at just 6.1%.
5
Original Text
Turning towards to the later pie chart, in France the nuclear proportion was twice as much for conventional thermal and renewable which is accounted for 13.7%and 10.3%.
Corrected
Corrected version:
Turning to the latter pie chart, in France, the proportion of nuclear power was twice as high as that of conventional thermal and renewable sources, accounting for 13.7% and 10.3% respectively.
Explanation:
"towards to" should be changed to "to the" for clarity.
"twice as much for" should be replaced with "twice as high as that of" to indicate a proper comparison.
"which is accounted for" should be changed to "accounting for" to provide correct phrasing.
A space should be added between "13.7%" and "and" to improve readability.
Improved
Improved version:
Turning to the later pie chart, France had twice as much nuclear power as conventional thermal and renewable sources, with proportions of 13.7% and 10.3% respectively.
6
Original Text
There was very less contribution of wind (10.5%)and biomass (8.1%)to generate the electricity whereas the highest amount of hydroelectric was in use ti produce the current which was six time higher than these two sources.
Corrected
Corrected version:
There was a very low contribution of wind (10.5%) and biomass (8.1%) to electricity generation, whereas the highest amount of hydroelectric power was used to produce electricity, which was six times higher than these two sources.
Explanation:
"very less contribution" should be changed to "a very low contribution" for proper phrasing.
A space should be added between "wind (10.5%)" and "and" for readability.
"to generate the electricity" can be simplified to "to electricity generation."
"in use ti produce the current" should be corrected to "used to produce electricity" for clarity.
"six time higher than these two sources" should be changed to "six times higher than these two sources" to reflect proper comparison.
Improved
Improved version:
Wind power (10.5%) and biomass (8.1%) made minimal contributions to electricity generation in France, whereas hydroelectric power was six times higher than these two sources.
Source: Ms Ramanpreet Kaur 17-07-23 Day 12
Original Text!
The provided to charts depicts the different elements and renewable sources which are used to generate electricity in Germany and France in 2009.
Overall, it is clearly evident that in Germany, the highest proportion of conventional thermal was used from all type of sources while in France highest percentage was nuclear power.
Moving with the former pie chart, 59.9% of conventional thermal was used to produce electricity which was the doubled of nuclear and renewable source 23.0% and 17.4% respectively. In terms of renewable, the figure for biomass and wind was much more higher comparative to the hydroelectric. Moreover, very fewer percentage of solar was added to make the electricity (6.1%).
Turning towards to the later pie chart, in France the nuclear proportion was twice as much for conventional thermal and renewable which is accounted for 13.7%and 10.3%. there was very less contribution of wind (10.5%)and biomass (8.1%)to generate the electricity whereas the highest amount of hydroelectric was in use ti produce the current which was six time higher than these two sources.
Corrected!
The provided charts depict the different elements and renewable sources that were used to generate electricity in Germany and France in 2009.
Overall, it is clearly evident that in Germany, the highest proportion of conventional thermal power was used from all types of sources, while in France, the highest percentage was nuclear power.
Moving with the former pie chart, 59.9% of conventional thermal energy was used to produce electricity, which was double the nuclear and renewable sources 23.0% and 17.4%, respectively. In terms of renewables, the figures for biomass and wind were much higher compared to hydroelectric. Moreover, a very small percentage of solar energy was added to make the electricity (6.1%).
Turning to the later pie chart, in France, the nuclear proportion was twice as much as conventional thermal and renewable, which accounted for 13.7% and 10.3%, respectively. There was a very low contribution of wind (10.5%) and biomass (8.1%) to generate the electricity, whereas the highest amount of hydroelectric was used to produce the current, which was six times higher than these two sources.
IMPROVED VERSION
The provided charts present a comparison of electricity generation in Germany and France in 2009, focusing on different energy sources and their proportions.
In terms of Germany, conventional thermal power emerged as the primary source, constituting 59.9% of the electricity generated. This was twice the combined percentage of nuclear (23.0%) and renewable (17.4%) sources. Notably, biomass and wind power had notably higher shares than hydroelectric power, while solar power accounted for a relatively small fraction (6.1%).
In contrast, France displayed a distinct energy landscape. Nuclear power claimed the highest proportion at 13.7%, surpassing both conventional thermal power and renewables (10.3%). Wind power (10.5%) and biomass (8.1%) made marginal contributions, while hydroelectric power stood out as the leading source, six times greater than the combined share of wind and biomass.
These charts provide valuable insights into the divergent energy profiles of Germany and France. While Germany relied heavily on conventional thermal power, France's energy generation predominantly centered around nuclear power. Renewable sources played a more substantial role in Germany, with biomass and wind power making noteworthy contributions. On the other hand, France relied on hydroelectric power as the primary renewable energy source.
Overall, these charts offer a comprehensive overview of the energy generation composition in Germany and France in 2009, shedding light on their unique energy strategies and highlighting the disparities between the two nations.
Key Phrases and Vocabulary
depict: to show or illustrate
elements: components or parts
renewable sources: sources of energy that can be naturally replenished
conventional thermal power: traditional power generated from sources like coal, oil, or gas
highest proportion: the largest percentage
nuclear power: energy generated from nuclear reactions
former pie chart: the first pie chart mentioned
doubled: increased two times
figure: a number or percentage
biomass: organic matter used as a source of energy
wind power: energy generated by the wind
hydroelectric: electricity generated from water power
very fewer percentage: a small percentage
solar power: energy from the sun
turning towards: shifting attention to
later pie chart: the second pie chart mentioned
accounted for: represented or comprised
very less contribution: a minimal or negligible contribution
highest amount: the greatest quantity
in use to produce: utilized for the purpose of generating
current: electricity
highlight: emphasize or draw attention to
reliance on: dependence on
dominance: the state of being in control or having authority
varying contributions: different levels of involvement or input
emerged as: became apparent or noticeable
constituting: making up or comprising
combined percentage: the total percentage when multiple elements are considered together
notably: notably: notably: especially or significantly
marginal contributions: small or insignificant contributions
divergent: differing or varying
predominantly: primarily or mostly
shed light on: provide information or understanding about
unique: distinct or individual
strategies: plans or approaches
disparities: differences or gaps
comprehensive overview: a thorough examination or summary