tpo22
The focus of both the reading and lecture is on using ethanol, which is a fuel made from plants such as corn, as an alternative for gasoline. Despite the author's statement that ethanol is not a good and efficient alternative for gasoline, the lecturer holds an opposing view. He is of the opinion that ethanol is actually a good alternative and the reason mentioned in the passage is not convincing.
First of all, the author holds the idea that ethanol would not solve the global warming problem. It is mentioned that burning ethanol would produce carbon dioxide, which is a greenhouse gas, and in result has no advantages compared to gasoline. The lecturer denies this notion and states that ethanol would not add gasoline to the environment. Furthermore, he argues that ethanol will release carbon dioxide to the atmosphere but it will be absorbed by the plants.
Secondly, the writer contends that most of the plants would be used to produce ethanol which will decrease the required food for the animal. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by asserting that producing ethanol does not have to reduce the amount of food for the animals. He elaborates on this by explaining that cell walls of the plants are used to make ethanol which is not eaten by animals.
Finally, it is claimed in the article that the actual price of ethanol is higher than gasoline. The author establishes that if the government omits the subsidies given to producers, the price of ethanol would be much higher than gasoline and will not be affordable by the consumers. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that in the future the price of ethanol would compete with the gasoline. He puts forth the idea that government subsidies always will not be needed since the increase in the amount of ethanol production will result in a decrease in the price of it.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 155, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...n alternative for gasoline. Despite the authors statement that ethanol is not a good an...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, such as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1523.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 316.0 270.72406181 117% => OK
Chars per words: 4.81962025316 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21620550194 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54803830404 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.449367088608 0.540411800872 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 487.8 419.366225166 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 26.2384085194 49.2860985944 53% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 108.785714286 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5714285714 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.5 7.06452816374 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.522471391299 0.272083759551 192% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.198395552349 0.0996497079465 199% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0567357933835 0.0662205650399 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.32299699656 0.162205337803 199% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0235088233048 0.0443174109184 53% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.97 12.2367328918 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.