tpo9
Both the reading and lecture are about hydrogen-based fuel-cell engine which seems to be a perfect replacement for internal- combustion engine in car industry. The reading provides three reasons that hydrogen- based engine can be more effective and then support them. The lecture casts doubt on the claims made in of article, as a matter fact the professor finds all arguments dubious.
First of all, the author of reading contends that since hydrogen- based engine can be obtained from a large number of natural resources such as water or gas; hence it is worthwhile and a renewable resource unlike internal-based engine which depends upon petroleum. This point is challenged by the lecturer. She believes hydrogen is not available simply and water is not applied in it directly; consequently the scientists have to transform hydrogen to pure liquid hydrogen form. Not only this process is very expensive, but also it is difficult, so it cannot be practical.
Secondly, the article proposes that needless to say that burning oil enters a great mass of carbon dioxide to atmosphere and this pollution can affect on environment negatively, in contrast, hydrogen- based engine works based on water. This argument is rebutted by the professor. She points out the producing of pure hydrogen requires a process which is called purification. The professor elaborates on this by mentioning that this procedure needs to burn oil and coal; subsequently not only atmosphere will be polluted, but also water will not be immune from pollution.
Finally, the reading declares that hydrogen- based engines are cost-effective and these types of engines are appropriate in consuming fuel and people are able to use them in an efficient way; Conversely, the professor refutes this statement. She claims that hydrogen engines can produce electricity only time that rare and expensive metals are employed in them. Cheap metals and available would not help in this way.
- tpo11 88
- do you agree or disagree children should spend most of their time on studying and playing and they shouldn t be required to help family with household chores such as cleaning and cooking 84
- Do you agree or disagree with this sentence?in the past, young people depended too much on their parents to make decisions for them; today young people are better to make decision about their lives 70
- Do you agree or disagree?successful people try new things and take risk than only doing what they already know how to do well. 82
- do you agree or disagree? the environment issues are too complex to be handled by individuals. 90
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 101, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...ogen- based engine can be obtained from a large number of natural resources such as water or gas;...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 145, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'effect'?
Suggestion: effect
...de to atmosphere and this pollution can affect on environment negatively, in contrast, hy...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 172, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an efficient way" with adverb for "efficient"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ng fuel and people are able to use them in an efficient way; Conversely, the professor refutes this...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, conversely, finally, first, hence, if, second, secondly, so, then, while, in contrast, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 10.4613686534 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1648.0 1373.03311258 120% => OK
No of words: 313.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26517571885 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20616286096 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84968981967 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 145.348785872 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.562300319489 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 522.9 419.366225166 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 71.6573835152 49.2860985944 145% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.714285714 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3571428571 21.698381199 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.5 7.06452816374 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 53.8541721854 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.0289183223 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.22 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 63.6247240618 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.