The reading passage and the lecture are both discussing possibility of replacing of gasoline by ethanol fuel. The writer claims three reasons to explain why ethanol is not a good replacement to gasoline. However, the lecture believes, ethanol is a perfect alternative to gasoline. Moreover, reasons which are mentioned in the article are inconvenience.
First, the author states, ethanol dose not add any benefit to environment. Its release carbon dioxide to air which increase global warming. This statement is contradicts by professor. She says, it is correct that ethanol release carbon dioxide, but, increase planting of corn which are used to make ethanol will decrease this gas in atmosphere. Plant use this gas for synthesis its food in photosynthesis process. As a result using ethanol dose not lead to increase in atmosphere pollution.
Second, the author mentions, using corn to produce ethanol will decrease these plants which can be used to feed other animal. The lecturer refutes this notion. She claims, animal eat cellulose which is a part of cell wall which is not used to make ethanol. Therefore, producing ethanol from plants will not interfere with animals feeding.
Finally, the writer asserts, ethanol has as cost as gasoline because, government help in form of tax subsidies given to ethanol producers. The professor in the other hand opposes this reason. She elaborate on, ethanol can compete with gasoline when increase in it use. Furthermore, when ethanol will be used more, the producers will provide it in high quantity. Since it price will become low.
The reading passage and the lecture are both discussing possibility of replacing of gasoline by ethanol fuel. The writer claims three reasons to explain why ethanol is not a good replacement to gasoline. However, the lecture believes, ethanol is a perfect alternative to gasoline. Moreover, reasons which are mentioned in article are inconvenience.
First, the author states, ethanol dose not add any benefit to environment. Its release carbon dioxide to air which increase global warming. This statement is contradicts by professor. She says, it is correct that ethanol release carbon dioxide, but, increase planting of corn which are used to make ethanol wll decrease this gas in atmosphere. Plant use this gas for synthesis its food in photosynthesis process. As a result using ethanol dose not lead to increase in atmosphere pollution.
Second, the author mentions, using corn to produce ethanol will decrease these plants which can be used to feed other animal. The lecturer refutes this notion. She claims, animal eat cellulose which is a part of cell wall which is not used to make ethanol. Therefore, producing ethanol from plants will not interfere with animals feeding.
Finally, the writer asserts, ethanol has as cost as gasoline because, government help in form of tax subsidies given to ethanol producers. The professor in the other hand opposes this reason. She elaborate on, ethanol can compete with gasoline when increase in it use. Furthermore, when ethanol will be used more, the producers will provide it in high quantity. Since it price will become low.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-08-09 | talelaldabous | 60 | view |
- The reading passage and the lecture are both talking about declination of bird population in United States The writer claims three reasons beyond this declination However the lecturer contradicts these reasons She thinks each reason is mentioned in readin 65
- The reading passage and lecture talk about type of fungus called Phytophthora which detected in forest of USA these fungus infects trees and cause serious damage to oak trees The author claims three methods to protect the forests The lecturer casts doubt 60
- The reading passage and lecture about farming of wild tuna the readind passage claims there are several problems faced tuna farming Th lecturer casts doubt on claim made in article He has contraversal ideas To begin with the author states femal tuna do no 80
- The reading and lecture about making a strict rules for handiling and storing coalk ash The representative companies of power have opposite veiw they argue that new regulation are not important and may cause negative consequent First the pwer company say 61
- Friendship is a crucial thing in our life and having a good friend is very helpful with our hard live which is weighed with many duties the question is whether keeping old friend better than doing new friends this can be weighed in a many aspects in my pe 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...entioned in article are inconvenience. First, the author states, ethanol dose n...
^^
Line 2, column 352, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'uses'.
Suggestion: uses
... decrease this gas in atmosphere. Plant use this gas for synthesis its food in phot...
^^^
Line 2, column 415, 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.
...sis its food in photosynthesis process. As a result using ethanol dose not lead to...
^^
Line 4, column 363, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” 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.
...ucers will provide it in high quantity. Since it price will become low.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, moreover, second, so, therefore, as for, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 7.30242825607 14% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1325.0 1373.03311258 97% => OK
No of words: 253.0 270.72406181 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2371541502 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98822939669 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7146756103 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.577075098814 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 429.3 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.7668672599 49.2860985944 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 69.7368421053 110.228320801 63% => OK
Words per sentence: 13.3157894737 21.698381199 61% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 7.06452816374 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.385989140548 0.272083759551 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.131879399358 0.0996497079465 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.170326484819 0.0662205650399 257% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.282887263074 0.162205337803 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.240337449247 0.0443174109184 542% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.9 13.3589403974 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.82 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.22 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.59 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.