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.
Both the reading and lecture discuss about the replacement of the internal-combustion engine by using hydrogen-based fuel cell engine, renewable sources of energy. The former argues that fuel cell engine numerous merit than internal-combustion, and provides three reasons to support, but latter challenges each of these points.
First of all, the author of the passage asserts that hydrogen fuel cell engine can easily extract from water and natural gas, and replaced the exhaustible resources. However, the professor in the lecture counters that this method will not work because hydrogen cannot be easily available, and to obtain pure hydrogen liquid, it has to go through different process which needs artificial technologies. To store such processed hydrogen it has to store in lab having a temperature 253 degree Celsius, which is quite costly and impractical.
Secondly, according to the passage, expert opined that hydrogen- fuel cell engine act as remedies to solve the problems of noxious gases emit out from internal-combusion engine, as its byproduct is water. In contrast, the lecture strongly objects this idea. She supports her argument by presenting the example of purification of hydrogen gas, which is impossible without burning oil and coals. The factories which produces pure hydogen needs burning fuels and oil, which directly generated the green house gases.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, as to, in contrast, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 10.4613686534 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 22.412803532 54% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1174.0 1373.03311258 86% => OK
No of words: 212.0 270.72406181 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.53773584906 5.08290768461 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.81578560438 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04757868628 2.5805825403 118% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.655660377358 0.540411800872 121% => OK
syllable_count: 359.1 419.366225166 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.959040578 49.2860985944 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.444444444 110.228320801 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5555555556 21.698381199 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.77777777778 7.06452816374 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 4.09492273731 73% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.239299210851 0.272083759551 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0934638629637 0.0996497079465 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0736340545424 0.0662205650399 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165779808143 0.162205337803 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0588367247935 0.0443174109184 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 13.3589403974 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 53.8541721854 74% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.15 12.2367328918 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.29 8.42419426049 122% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted. The correct pattern:
para 1: introduction
para 2: doubt 1
para 3: doubt 2
para 4: doubt 3
Less contents wanted from the reading passages(25%), more content wanted from the lecture (75%).
Don't need a conclusion paragraph.
Read sample essays from ETS:
http://www.testbig.com/users/toeflwritingmaster
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.