四个国家的可再生能源占比

The response covers all four countries and identifies important features in its overview. Most estimates are reasonable, but Turkey’s 2000 peak and Sweden’s later figures are omitted. Iceland’s final share is described as above 70% although the bar reaches that gridline, and references to production or use sometimes misidentify the chart’s measure of supply.

Ideas are logically sequenced from overview to country-by-country detail with effective use of referencing and cohesive devices such as 'meanwhile', 'similarly', and 'regarding'.

Vocabulary is varied, with expressions such as “witnessed an upward trend” and “came from renewable resources”. Precision is weaker in “most popular” and “natural resources”, which do not accurately name the chart’s comparison or energy category, and some prepositional expressions need attention.

Complex sentences and relative clauses show generally good control. Local errors include the semicolon introducing the list of years, “who” referring to Sweden as a country, and the missing article in “in regards to proportion”. These slips do not prevent understanding.