Ethanol fuel, made from plants such as corn and sugar cane, has been advocated by some people as an alternative to gasoline in the United States. However, many critics argue that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline for several reasons.
The reading and the lecture are both about using ethanol fuel as an alternative to gasoline. While the author of the reading states three reasons to argue that ethanol is not a sufficient alternative, the lecture challenges each of these reasons.
To begin with, the writer argues that using ethanol will contribute to increasing global warming such as gasoline does. The lecturer, however, refutes this by mentioning that ethanol will not add to the global warming by the carbon dioxide that it releases. This is because that plants are absorbing carbon dioxide, so there is no additional damage will be added to the environment by using ethanol fuel.
Secondly, the writer mentions that the production of a large amount of ethanol would have a negative impact on many animals that use corn plants as a food resource. The professor challenges this specific argument by stating that there is another kind of plant, which is not eaten, that could be used to produce ethanol fuel. As a result, the animals' food resources will not be reduced.
Lastly, the author says that ethanol will not be a good alternative to gasoline in the aspect of the price. Additionally, he states that even the current prices of ethanol and gasoline are the same, this is because of the subsidies that are given by the government to the production of ethanol. In cotrast, the lecturer argues that if people stopped using gasoline and instead started using ethanol, companies will produce huge amounts of gasoline, therefore, the prices will dropdown. Moreover, he mentions a study that shows that prices of ethanol will be reduced by 40% if ethanol production doubled three times.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-27 | sandeshbhandari2 | 60 | view |
| 2020-01-23 | supergirl20 | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-23 | supergirl20 | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-21 | nusybah | 83 | view |
| 2020-01-06 | S M Naimul Mamun | 71 | view |
- A little over 2,200 years ago, the Roman navy attacked the Greek port city of Syracuse. According to some ancient historians, the Greeks defended themselves with an ingenious weapon called a “burning mirror”: a polished copper surface curved to focus 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People communicate with each other less than in the past because of the popularity of television. Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion. 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement The knowledge we gain from personal experiences is more valuable than the experience we gain from books Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer Do not use memorized examples 40
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?People learn things better from those at their own level—such as fellowstudents or co-workers—than from those at a higher level, such as teachers orsupervisors.Use specific reasons and examples to 70
- Tidal power 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 344, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'animals'' or 'animal's'?
Suggestion: animals'; animal's
... produce ethanol fuel. As a result, the animals food resources will not be reduced. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 8, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...urces will not be reduced. Lastly, the author says that ethanol will not be...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, lastly, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, kind of, such as, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1395.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 277.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03610108303 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57295637812 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.490974729242 0.540411800872 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 445.5 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.4496418211 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.25 110.228320801 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0833333333 21.698381199 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0 7.06452816374 142% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.247899949279 0.272083759551 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107736814507 0.0996497079465 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0456451054213 0.0662205650399 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.156636013656 0.162205337803 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0283470643433 0.0443174109184 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 53.8541721854 89% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.54 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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.