The reading and the listening passages are both about ethanol fuel, which made from plants such as corn. While the reading passage argues that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline, the lecturer casts doubt on each point.
First of all, the author mentions that ethanol offers no environmental advantage offer gasoline because it releases carbon dioxide which leads to global warming. The professor rebuts this argue by stating it helps to remove carbon dioxide because of ethanol is made from the plant. The process of producing carbon dioxide is counteracting by planting corns because it will remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
Secondly, the writer mentions that if ethanol would be used, a substantial source of food for animals such as cows and chicken would disappear. However, the professor contends that ethanol is produced from not eaten parts of plants, which is cellulose. They use it to produce ethanol. Therefore, it would not affect animals’ food.
Finally, the reading passage points out that the ethanol would increase greatly if the government stop helping producers. Moreover, the price of ethanol will never compete with gasoline. In contrast, the lecturer contends that the price now is similar to gasoline because people do not use ethanol. If people start to use ethanol, the process would decrease and compete for gasoline. Also, he adds that according to study the prices of ethanol would decrease 3 times if production of ethanol increased by 40%.
To conclude, the professor clearly debunks all the points that the author made on the reading passage.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 511, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...production of ethanol increased by 40%. To conclude, the professor clearly debun...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, in contrast, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1356.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 258.0 270.72406181 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25581395349 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00778971557 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54499795727 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 145.348785872 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.53488372093 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 416.7 419.366225166 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => 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: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.9525158616 49.2860985944 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.4 110.228320801 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.26666666667 7.06452816374 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => 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: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.532968712221 0.272083759551 196% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.195148393932 0.0996497079465 196% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0816558342643 0.0662205650399 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.258967317814 0.162205337803 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.140364813909 0.0443174109184 317% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.93 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.5 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.