Please help me with corrections and comments！THANKS! The graph below reveals the changes in the consumption of energy in the USA from 1980 with projections to 2030. In 1980, the consumption of petrol and oil was about 35q, much more than other energy,. The other consumption of natural gas and coal were second and third with about 20q and 16q respectively. While the nuclear, solar/wind and hydropower all were the least consumption just under 5q. However, during 28 years, from 1980 to 2008, all consumption of energy increased except that hydropower remained unchanged. What`s more, the figures of coal and petrol and oil rose to around 6q. The consumption of natural gas, nuclear and solar/wind also increased, but less than significantly to just below 3q. Further more, the projections indicate that the consumption of petrol and coal will increase steadily, the natural gas would remain unchanged after it rise to 25q, the nuclear and solar/wind are keeping the same untill 2025 and then they would increase a few. But, only hydropower show a slight downward trend decline about 1q. Overall, the garph clearly exhibits the changes in consumption of energy about history and projections. It is safe to draw a conclusion that the petrol, coal and natural gas will still be main fuel in future in the USA.

Every year several languages die out Topic：Every year several languages die out. Some people think that this is not important because life will ba easier if there are fewer languages in the world. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? Wether the extinction of some languages do benefit or harm to human society has become an issue that attracts significant concerns from the general public. Different interpretations regarding it have been noticed. Some individuals hold a positive attitude, asserting that life will be easier if there are fewer languages in the world. While others maintain a contratry stand point. As far as I am concerned, the latter viewppoint is convincing. It`s undeniable taht some languages dying out is of certain benefits interms of communication between people who come from different countries and people don`t have to spend time and money to learn some other languages. In spite of the advantages mentioned above, it is worthwhile to note that more disadvantages should be concerned due to this problem. The first point that needs to be taken into consideration is that language is a indispensible part of culture and a symbol of a race. Some argue that once a language dies out, then with it the culture and spirit of this country, which is urgently needed by our society with development of high-tech but lack of humanistic feeling. Beyond the poin demonstrated above, there lies a more in- depth reason that supports my point of view: the extinction of a language would bury this race`s wit and wisdom. It should be noticed the Maya civilization, a race with ameizing intelligence. Long ago, Maya people had great achievements on astronomy, mathmatics, agriculture and so on. Some even better than now, However, these achievements remain mysteries owing to the disappearance of Maya civilization. Dispite some relative relics were found, scientists were not able to study them without their language. To summarize, the discussion cited above lays emphasis on the extinction of languages would take away culture, spirit and wisdom at the same time. From what has been illustrated above, it is safe to draw the conclusion that there are many disadvantges on the disappearance of some languages.

Please help me with corrections and comments！THANKS! The graph below reveals the changes in the consumption of energy in the USA from 1980 with projections to 2030. In 1980, the consumption of petrol and oil was about 35q, much more than other energy,. The other consumption of natural gas and coal were second and third with about 20q and 16q respectively. While the nuclear, solar/wind and hydropower all were the least consumption just under 5q. However, during 28 years, from 1980 to 2008, all consumption of energy increased except that hydropower remained unchanged. What`s more, the figures of coal and petrol and oil rose to around 6q. The consumption of natural gas, nuclear and solar/wind also increased, but less than significantly to just below 3q. Further more, the projections indicate that the consumption of petrol and coal will increase steadily, the natural gas would remain unchanged after it rise to 25q, the nuclear and solar/wind are keeping the same untill 2025 and then they would increase a few. But, only hydropower show a slight downward trend decline about 1q. Overall, the garph clearly exhibits the changes in consumption of energy about history and projections. It is safe to draw a conclusion that the petrol, coal and natural gas will still be main fuel in future in the USA.

My Hobbies(Please give me some corrections~~~ thank you) Since I was a child, I started to interested in many things, such as music, sports, art and so forth. I still dreamed to play piano, but piano and it`s tuition both were expensive at that time, so my mother took me to learn Chinese paint when I was 6 years old. After that, my dad had took me to learn ping pong for 1 year. I learned swim in a summer of my grade 5. When I was gradutated from high school, I decided to study violin, however, I coudln`t insist on. After I went to university, I joined the basketball team and orchestra, so I started my saxphone career and it is the instrument that I can play well right now. I still want to learn to play piano when I work in the future.

Please give me some corrections for my writting~~~~Thanks!!!! The curve graph makes a comprison among chicken, beef, lamb and fish in terms of consumption per person per week in an Europe country from 1979 to 2004. As indicated in the graph, the consumption of beef, lamb and fish all exhibited a downward trend during 1979 to 2004. The figure of beef fluctuated dramatically most during the descent. It once occupied the biggest consumption accountting for 220g and then increased to almost 240g before eventually declined to about 100g。 However the change of lamb was gentler than beef, it declined from 150g to 60g. But the statistics of fish changed a little, just decreased about 10g. By the contrast, the consumtion of chicken exhibited a remarkable tendency of rise from 140g to 250g,the only one increased. From the figures demonstrated above , it is safe to draw a conclusion that people in Europe country would rather choose beef and lamb than chicken before 1989. But after that chicken got more favor from people out of some reasons.