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 being environmentally friendly substance. and does not cause a scarce in food supply to animals, so he refutes each claim presented by the author.
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 does not cause a reduction in food supply to animals. The author posits that extracting ethanol plants causes animal hunger because no food would become available for animals. However, the lecturer contends not all parts of the plant is needed to extract ethanol but, Specifically, the part which contains cellulose cellulose is the one needed. Thus, extraction of ethanol from plants does not tremendously affect the food supply to animals because animals does not eat the cellulose part of the plant.
Finally, the lecturer states that the cost of producing ethanol is not a big concern. The author claims that using ethanol instead of gasoline for energy supply is a costly option. On the other hand, The lecturer states 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 would result in a 40% reduction in price. Thus, the extraction of ethanol would not only be feasible, but also economical.
- learning from reading is more educational than learning from watching television programs 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Governments should spend more money in support of the arts than in support of athletics such as state-sponsored Olympic teams. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
- Ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline. 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 73
- People learn in different ways. Some people learn by doing things, other people learn by reading about things, others learn by listening to people talk about things.Which of these methods of learning is best for you? Use specific examples to support your 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 237, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: And
...ing environmentally friendly substance. and does not cause a scarce in food supply ...
^^^
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 391, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: cellulose
..., Specifically, the part which contains cellulose cellulose is the one needed. Thus, extraction of ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, 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: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1645.0 1373.03311258 120% => OK
No of words: 314.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23885350318 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20951839842 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62788504189 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 145.348785872 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.480891719745 0.540411800872 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 518.4 419.366225166 124% => 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: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.4785259895 49.2860985944 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.666666667 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9333333333 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.6 7.06452816374 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => 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: 0.20679634639 0.272083759551 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0864673190242 0.0996497079465 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.050960672478 0.0662205650399 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131231228923 0.162205337803 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0501943963477 0.0443174109184 113% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => 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: 8.15 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.