TPO 09 integrated - hydrogen engines are better because they are always available they do not pollute the air the are cheaper
The reading asserts that hydrogen-powered cars are better than oil-powered vehicles, and the professor slightly agrees with some of its points; however, she claims that the article is too optimistic about the advantages of these new engines. She supports her explanation with three major presumptions which will be elaborated thoroughly in the following.
First of all, the passage assumes that petroleum is a finite source and will end finally, so hydrogen as an infinite source can easily replace the it. Nonetheless, the lecturer completely disagrees with this perception since she concurs with that hydrogen is not the solution as it is not available in suitable form of fuel even though it is all around the world in other forms like water. Making hydrogen in pure liquid state can only be achieved in highly artificial manners; furthermore, its storage can only be done in tempratures under minus 200 celcius degrees.
Secondly, the reading upholds that this state-of-the-art fuel can finish the world's pollution issues. On the other hand, the professor overthrows this justification insomuch as she states that the production of hydrogen is not environmental-friendly. She posits that its purification needs a preponderance of energy in forms of either oil or coal. Therefore, the factories will pollute the air despite the fact that hydrogen pollutes the air lesser than petroleum.
Third, the author claims that fuel-cells are more feasable than internal-combustion engines and more competetive. Notwithstanding, the teacher refutes this rationalization and states that these new engines will not save any money inasmuch as they need an expensive metal, platinume, in order to undergo the electrical functions. Moreover, she says that other cheaper materials cannot be replace by this metal as their functionality with hydrogen engines have been proved unsuccessfully.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-02-02 | armin mirhoseiny | 85 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 144, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'it'?
Suggestion: the; it
...s an infinite source can easily replace the it. Nonetheless, the lecturer completely d...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 78, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'worlds'' or 'world's'?
Suggestion: worlds'; world's
...is state-of-the-art fuel can finish the worlds pollution issues. On the other hand, th...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1598.0 1373.03311258 116% => OK
No of words: 289.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.52941176471 5.08290768461 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29002246101 2.5805825403 127% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.615916955017 0.540411800872 114% => OK
syllable_count: 494.1 419.366225166 118% => 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
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.8817351342 49.2860985944 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.166666667 110.228320801 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0833333333 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.3333333333 7.06452816374 160% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.347461458127 0.272083759551 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111134424929 0.0996497079465 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0607120883587 0.0662205650399 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.189323746769 0.162205337803 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0719103298826 0.0443174109184 162% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 13.3589403974 125% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 53.8541721854 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.0289183223 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.09 12.2367328918 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.85 8.42419426049 117% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 63.6247240618 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.