tpo 22 using ethanol instead of gasoline
The reading and the listening are about using ethanol instead of gasoline. While the author claims that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline, the professor refutes all the claims made by the listening and states that ethanol can be a good alternative to gasoline.
First, the speaker contends that ethanol could not solve the problem of global warming. On the contrary, the lecturer opposes this and mentions that ethanol could not add to global warming. The professor explains that ethanol is made from plants, such as corn, so people should grow plants in order to produce ethanol. The lecturer points out that growing plants could absorb carbon dioxide from the air and reduce global warming.
Second, the reading states that using ethanol could reduce the amount of food available for animals. On the other hand, the listening contradicts this and says that cellulose is the main part of the plant that should be used to produce ethanol. The professor mentions that cellulose could be found only on the cell wall, which is in the part of plants that do not be eaten by animals. As a result, the lecturer adds that using plants to produce ethanol will not diminish the amount of food for animals.
Third, the writer claims that ethanol could not compete with gasoline in the term of price. Conversely, the lecturer refutes this and posits that ethanol could compete with gasoline in the future. The professor explains that if people start to buy ethanol, its production will increase, which could drop its price. The speaker mentions that there is a statistic done found that if the production of ethanol is three-time greater than today, the cost of ethanol production will drop by forty percent.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-28 | Christine hanna | 73 | view |
| 2019-10-30 | nagy | 66 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the statement? Technology has made children less creative than they were in the past. Use specific reasons and example to support your answer. 66
- the opinions of celebrities are more important to younger people than to the older people? 73
- tpo 47 pterosaurs could perform powered flight 81
- tpo 35 smart cars that could drive themselves 76
- tpo 38 an international funds for the world's forests 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 501, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... production will drop by forty percent.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, first, if, second, so, third, while, such as, as a result, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 5.04856512141 277% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 12.0772626932 157% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1428.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 289.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94117647059 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.33349382352 2.5805825403 90% => OK
Unique words: 123.0 145.348785872 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.425605536332 0.540411800872 79% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 429.3 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 15.0 8.23620309051 182% => 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: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.10278581 49.2860985944 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.0 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6428571429 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.5 7.06452816374 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.415637280196 0.272083759551 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.176570429559 0.0996497079465 177% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0757939215032 0.0662205650399 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.26873305651 0.162205337803 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0281777655781 0.0443174109184 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.2 8.42419426049 85% => OK
difficult_words: 47.0 63.6247240618 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 20.0 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.