The lecturer disputes the idea presented in the reading that ethanol cannot be an alternative source of energy to gasoline. He asserts that ethanol has some advantages over gasoline in terms of it's positive effect on the environment. Furthermore, the cost of extracting ethanol to supply energy is most likely to decrease significantly in the future.
First, the lecturer argues that plants that produces ethanol reduces the greenhouse effect. The author claims that ethanol causes global warming because the extraction process results in an increase in temperature . However, the lecturer suggests that ethanol cannot have such effect because the producing plants consumes carbon dioxide from air and releases oxygen, which in turn, causes a reduction in the continuous increase in temperature on the surface of the earth.
Secondly, the lecturer states that using large amounts of plants to extract ethanol reduces the amount of food available for animals. On the other hand, the lecturer contends that ethanol is extracted from cellulose, which is a parts of the plants that animals do not eat. In reality, he confirms that other parts of the plants are available as good supply of food for animals. Thus, extraction of ethanol from plants does not tremendously affect the food supply to animals
Finally, the lecturer states that the cost of producing ethanol is not a big concern. He acknowledges that even though the cost of extracting ethanol is expensive at the moment. It is most likely to decrease once production increases. For instance, a three fold increase in production of ethanol for energy will result in a tremendous 40% reduction in price. Thus, the extraction of ethanol would not only be feasible, but also economical.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 214, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...ss results in an increase in temperature . However, the lecturer suggests that eth...
^^
Line 5, column 227, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a part' or simply 'parts'?
Suggestion: a part; parts
...l is extracted from cellulose, which is a parts of the plants that animals do not eat. ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, thus, for instance, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 30.3222958057 132% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1468.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 280.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24285714286 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09062348924 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73226651853 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 137.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.489285714286 0.540411800872 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 465.3 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.6452088666 49.2860985944 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.857142857 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 21.698381199 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06452816374 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.257109398262 0.272083759551 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0925801269116 0.0996497079465 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0482253480168 0.0662205650399 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.153598323326 0.162205337803 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0406708747147 0.0443174109184 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 53.8541721854 79% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => 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.