With the speculation by many leading geologists that petroleum reserves will be exhausted within the next fifty years, a number of alternatives to petroleum have been proposed. One of the most promising alternatives being researched is hydrogen cell technology, which could easily replace traditional gasoline as fuel for automobiles. The adoption of hydrogen as an alternative fuel has many advantages.
First, hydrogen is one of the most abundant elements on the planet. It is a naturally occurring element that can be found around the world. One of the most common sources of hydrogen is H20, or water, which consists of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom. Since water makes up over seventy-five percent of the Earth, hydrogen would be an ideal source of energy for nearly all countries on the planet.
Moreover, hydrogen can be concentrated and stored in small containers called "cells." Hydrogen cells are smaller and far easier to transport than gasoline, since they can simply be stacked on a truck for transportation instead of carried in a large tank. Unlike gasoline, which can leak out of the tank and catch fire if there is an accident, hydrogen cells' easily transportable form makes them far safer to move.
Additionally, when placed in cars, hydrogen is much more efficient than gasoline. It takes far more gasoline to move a car across a certain distance than it does for hydrogen. In fact, hydrogen fuel cells can transform twice as much energy into power as gasoline can. Adopting hydrogen cell technology in automobiles would vastly improve the efficiency of our vehicles. As such, countries looking to adopt new sources of energy would be wise to research hydrogen as an alternative fuel source.
In this set of materials hydrogen introduced to be an alternative of gasoline as a new source of energy. While the writer of the letter enumerates three advantages of hydrogen such as: abundant of hydrogen in many palces, safe usage and transportation, and efficient yield rather than gasoline, the lecturer wholy rejects those pluses and refuts the author's reasons one by one.
First, the professor points out that hydrogen is not available in pure form, which it should be when we want to use in cars. Even though, it is in water molecules, we can't use water directly. And we should extract and purify hydrogen molecule from water. She directly repudiates this idea that hudrogen is a plentiful resource and available in all countries.
Second, the speaker posits that hydrogen is a very dangerous fuel rather than gasoline. Hydrogen is the most flammable material as we could make bomd out of it, while gasoline is just falmmable, the professor says. In case of an accident in road gasoline will burn, while a tank of hydrogen will explode and make a wreak havok. With this explanation, the professor devalues the author's ides about the safty of using hydrogen as a fuel in cars.
Third, the professor avers that hydrogen is not much efficeint rather than gasoline, when we take this into account that we should use an enourmous amount of energy to purify hydrogen. This energy consuming purification process will put a huge negative footprint on environment. As we see the hydrogen does not have a pros on gasoline when it comes to environment impact.
- tpo25 3
- Some people think that it s important to follow traditions even if they are different from individuals interests Others believe that individuals preferences are more essential than traditions Which view do you agree with and why 87
- TPO 28 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the statement that people who learn many different skills are more successful than those who focus on only one skill 88
- tpo 49 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 87, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...o be an alternative of gasoline as a new source of energy. While the writer of th...
^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...efuts the authors reasons one by one. First, the professor points out that hyd...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 173, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...en though, it is in water molecules, we cant use water directly. And we should extra...
^^^^
Line 2, column 365, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...esource and available in all countries. Second, the speaker posits that hydrogen...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 314, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... tank of hydrogen will explode and make a wreak havok. With this explanation, the profe...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... of using hydrogen as a fuel in cars. Third, the professor avers that hydrogen...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 286, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...huge negative footprint on environment. As we see the hydrogen does not have a pro...
^^
Line 5, column 323, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a pro' or simply 'pros'?
Suggestion: a pro; pros
...t. As we see the hydrogen does not have a pros on gasoline when it comes to environmen...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, second, so, third, while, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1297.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 264.0 270.72406181 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91287878788 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69353873951 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 145.348785872 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.556818181818 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 423.9 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 1.25165562914 479% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.1393167273 49.2860985944 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.7692307692 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3076923077 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.38461538462 7.06452816374 48% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 4.19205298013 191% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.128344949284 0.272083759551 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0482202607619 0.0996497079465 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0356242570504 0.0662205650399 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.082552117259 0.162205337803 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0372840705951 0.0443174109184 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.2 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.