The reading and lecture both discuss using of ethanol as an alternative of gasoline. While the reading provides three disadvantages of using the ethanol instead of gasoline, the professor refutes saying none of these claims are convincing.
Firstly, the reading avers that using the ethanol could not help us to solve the greenhouse gas problem. This is because the ethanol fuel provides the air with carbon dioxide. On the other hand, the professor argues this notion by saying that the increase of ethanol fuel production could not increase the greenhouse gas. This is because the increase of carbon dioxide in the air will counteracted by the plant growth. Furthermore, the plants absorb the carbon dioxide from the air as a nutrient in order to grow. As a result, the carbon dioxide lever could not increase the temperature.
In addition, the reading mentions that using the plants for ethanol production will decrease then food sources for many animals. However, the professor rejects this point by explaining that the ethanol production does not have to decrease the source of food for animals. Moreover, they use cellelose for ethanol production which is not eaten by animals. So, the animals food source would not reduce.
Lastly, the article states that there is no competition between gasoline and ethanol on price. This is because if the government help the ethanol production by tax subsides. Nevertheless, the professor contradicts this idea by pointing out that the ethanol can compete with gasoline on price. Furthermore, ethanol is cheaper than gasoline. This is because of of these supports that need it for ethanol will increase the production. So, the increase of production will cause drop in price. Consequently, the ethanol production will increased by three times and the price will dropped by forty percent.
- TPO-48 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Because modern life is very complex, it is essential for young people to have the ability to plan and organize. 60
- TPO 29-Integrated writing 78
- TPO-07 - Integrated Writing Task In an effort to encourage ecologically sustainable forestry practices, an international organization started issuing certifications to wood companies that meet high ecological standards by conserving resources and recyclin 3
- TPO-50 - Integrated Writing Task 3
- TPO-25 - Integrated Writing Task 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 363, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'animals'' or 'animal's'?
Suggestion: animals'; animal's
... which is not eaten by animals. So, the animals food source would not reduce. Lastly...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 357, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: of
... cheaper than gasoline. This is because of of these supports that need it for ethanol...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 532, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'increase'
Suggestion: increase
...nsequently, the ethanol production will increased by three times and the price will dropp...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 576, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'drop'
Suggestion: drop
...eased by three times and the price will dropped by forty percent.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, lastly, moreover, nevertheless, so, then, while, in addition, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1545.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 296.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21959459459 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68725101621 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.452702702703 0.540411800872 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 476.1 419.366225166 114% => 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: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.9325958297 49.2860985944 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 81.3157894737 110.228320801 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.5789473684 21.698381199 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.78947368421 7.06452816374 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.480589003672 0.272083759551 177% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.167255562112 0.0996497079465 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0657878524189 0.0662205650399 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.284074384822 0.162205337803 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0632427335106 0.0443174109184 143% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.7 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.58 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 63.6247240618 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => 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.