The reading and lecture both discuss the using of ethanol as a source of fuel instead of gasoline. While the reading provides three reasone to support the idea that ehhanol is not a good alternative to gasoline, the professor refutes, saying none of these claims are convincing.
Firstly the article avers that the production of ethanol can not solve the problem of enviromental pollution with gasoline. This is because the production of ethanol will increase the level of carbon dioxide into the air. On the other hand, the professor argues this notion by saying that the production of ethanol will increase the carbon dioxide level, but this will not add to the global warming. Furthermore, growing the plants like corn contradicts the increase in carbon dioxide in air. in fact, the plants that we use it in the ethanol production will absorb the carbon dioxide as a nutrient. So, the ethanol will not cause pollution to the environment.
Second, the reading states that using the plants for ethanol production will decrease the plants. In addition, theses plants are considred as an important source of food for many animals. However, the professor rejects this idea by pointing put that the ethanol production does not need to decrease the animal food. Moreover, the production needs the just the cellelose layer from plants and this layer does not eaten by animals. As a result, animal's food will not affected.
Lastly, the article mentions that the price of ethanol can not compete with the gasoline's price in the future. This is because now the governiment decrease the tax on ethanol. Nevertheness, the professor question this idea by explaining that this is ture that the government makes the ethanol more cheaper, but they will produce more from ethanol. So, the increase in ethanol production will cause drop in the price. In addition, the cost production will decrease by fourty percent.
- TPO-45 Integrated Writing Task 3
- TPO-31- Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Because the world is changing so quickly, people now are less happy or less satisfied with their lives than people were in the pastUse specific reasons and examples to 70
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Parents today are more involved in their children’s education than were parents in the past.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
- TPO-22 - Integrated Writing Task Ethanol fuel, made from plants such as corn and sugar cane, has been advocated by some people as an alternative to gasoline in the United States. However, many critics argue that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasol 73
- TPO 41 - integrated writing 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 494, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: In
... the increase in carbon dioxide in air. in fact, the plants that we use it in the ...
^^
Line 5, column 466, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'affect'
Suggestion: affect
...als. As a result, animals food will not affected. Lastly, the article mentions that t...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 294, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'cheaper' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: cheaper
...e that the government makes the ethanol more cheaper, but they will produce more from ethano...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, lastly, moreover, second, so, then, while, in addition, in fact, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 5.04856512141 257% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 5.01324503311 339% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1595.0 1373.03311258 116% => OK
No of words: 315.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06349206349 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56582968753 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.44126984127 0.540411800872 82% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 491.4 419.366225166 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.6626754006 49.2860985944 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.6111111111 110.228320801 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5 21.698381199 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.66666666667 7.06452816374 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.415793839714 0.272083759551 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.150600867442 0.0996497079465 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0760983116666 0.0662205650399 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.246897437523 0.162205337803 152% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0649406413143 0.0443174109184 147% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 13.3589403974 84% => 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: 11.77 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.74 8.42419426049 92% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.