The graph depicts the percentage of four different materials recycled over the period of 28 years

Recycling Rate for selected materials 1982-2010

The graph depicts the percentage of four different materials recycled ( paper and cardboard, glass containers, aluminium cans and plastics) over 28 years from 1982 to 2010.

Overall, there was an upward trend in recycling paper and cardboard, compared to other materials, this rate was higher. Glass containers and aluminium cans had a rise throughout the period, whilst plastics was the least recycled between 1982 and 2010.

It is noticeable that 60% of paper and cardboard was recycled in 1982. This figure increased slightly to 70% in the year 1986 and dropped at 65% throughout the year 1990. Afterwards, paper and cardboard had a dramatic increase to 80% 4 years after, but suddenly had a decline and hit to 70% in the year 2010. This rate was higher, compared to other materials under 70%.

As we can see in the chart, glass containers were 50% in the beginning year ( in 1982), then significantly decreased to 40% in 1990. In addition, the recycling of glass containers shown an upturn and hit 60% for 20 years. It is interesting to note that aluminium cans recycled began in 1986. Although there were 5% of them were recycled, the rate started to rose enormously and picked up to 45% in 2010. Plastic recycling began in 1990 and remained the least recycled material ( less than 10%) throughout the given period.

Incomplete image identifier. What type of graph? Review and memorize the differences.

Your first trending sentence should have beepresented in 2 sentences:
- Upward thend
- Other material reference


Use a more specific year reference point for better graph point referencing.


You can indicate the year in a parenthesis for GRA scoring improvement.


You did not provide the image. You cannot use this reference. Since you did not establish a proper mental description in the summary overview, the reader cannot create an accurate mental description in reference to this phrase.

* Limited review provided due to lack of image for comparison purposes.