Car manufacturers and governments have been eagerly seeking a replacement for the automobile's main source of power, the internal-combustion engine. By far the most promising alternative source of energy for cars is the hydrogen-based fuel-cell engine, which uses hydrogen to create electricity that, in turn, powers the car. Fuel-cell engines have several advantages over internal-combustion engines and will probably soon replace them.
One of the main problems with the internal-combustion engine is that it relies on petroleum, either in the form of gasoline or diesel fuel. Petroleum is a finite resource; someday, we will run out of oil. The hydrogen needed for fuel-cell engines cannot easily be depleted. Hydrogen can be derived from various plentiful sources, including natural gas and even water. The fact that fuel-cell engines utilize easily available, renewable resources makes them particularly attractive.
Second, hydrogen-based fuel cells are attractive because they will solve many of the world's pollution problems. An unavoidable by-product of burning oil is carbon dioxide, and carbon dioxide harms the environment. On the other hand, the only byproduct of fuel-cell engines is water.
Third, fuel-cell engines will soon be economically competitive because people will spend less money to operate a fuel-cell engine than they will to operate an internal-combustion engine. This is true for one simple reason: a fuel-cell automobile is nearly twice as efficient in using its fuel as an automobile powered by an internal-combustion engine is. In other words, the fuel-cell powered car requires only half the fuel energy that the internal-combustion powered car does to go the same distance.
The article states that the hydrogen fuel cell engine will replace the internal combustion engine and it provides three reasons to support it. However, the professor refuses the claim and she provides three reasons each refutes the purposed claim by the article.
First, the reading claim that the hydrogen fuel-based engine will not be short out of the fuel as in the internal combustion engine. The professor says that the fuel-based engine indeed have a finite source but, the claim is too optimistic of its use. She states that it will not be easily available as found in water. It requires a certain artificial process to isolate out to pure form for its use. She also emphasizes that the cost of the isolation will be very exorbitant to cover as it has to store in the temperature of - 253-degree celsius.
Second, the article posits that the fuel-based engine is pollution free as compared to the contemporary one. However, the professor refuses this point by saying that for its use, a lot of purification is required which produces pollution gases in the process. According to the professor, very large energy is required to produce usable hydrogen; it requires coal in huge amount which is a chief source of pollution.
At last, the article claims that the fuel-based engine needs less money to run than the internal combustion engine. The professor refuses the claim by saying that it requires expensive materials to manufacture. She also states that the fuel-based engine requires platinum which is very expensive in itself. Without it, hydrogen will no do a chemical reaction in the engine. However, the metal is so rare and expensive, the last use of the engine cost a fortune. On the other hand, the earlier experiments for replacing platinum in the engine were failed several times making the highest cost of the engine inevitable.
- Some people say that the Internet provides people with a lot of valuable information Others think access to much information creates problems Which view do you agree with Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 76
- do you agree or disagree with the following statement technology has made children less creative than they were in the past Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 43
- TPO-21 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?For success in a future job, the ability to relate well to people is more important than studying hard in school. Use specific reasons and examples to support your ans 70
- Populations of the yellow cedar 73
- Glass is a favored building material for modern architecture, yet it is also very dangerous for wild birds. Because they often cannot distinguish between glass and open air, millions of birds are harmed every year when they try to fly through glass window 80
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, second, so, as to, 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: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1555.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 310.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01612903226 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62903769612 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 145.348785872 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.474193548387 0.540411800872 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 500.4 419.366225166 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.6367988108 49.2860985944 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.1875 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.375 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.1875 7.06452816374 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => 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: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.21810738714 0.272083759551 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0779137896355 0.0996497079465 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0666454683795 0.0662205650399 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.14142737283 0.162205337803 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0246380072288 0.0443174109184 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.89 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.