The passage states that ethanol fuel is not a good replacement for gasoline. However, the listening refutes it. The professor says that the passage is not convincing and ethanol fuel is a good replacement.
First, the article points out that ethanol fuel would not help to solve the environmental problems caused by gasoline use: global warming. However, the speaker states that ethanol fuel will not add to global warning. It is true that the burning release carbon dioxide, but the plants used to make ethanol fuel, such as corn. The growing of the plants counteracts the carbon dioxide, especially adsorbs it as nutrition and removes it from the atmosphere. This is directly contradicts whats the passage indicates.
Secondly, the passage mentions that the amount of plants will be reduced. However, the professor posits that ethanol fuel can be made by part of the plants which can not be eaten by animals. So feed will not be reduced. This is another part where is contradict to the reading passage.
Third, the passage argues that ethanol fuel will never be able to compete with gasoline on price. However the speaker rejects this by explaining that the by increasing producing the ethanol fuel, the price will drop. The price will go down if more ethanol fuel is available. Later, the price of the gasoline will be 3 times of nowadays while the price of the ethanol fuel will be only 40% of the price nowadays. So the theory from the passage is inconceivable to be true
- Your school has enough money to purchase either computers for students or books for the library. Which should your school choose to buy - computers or books? Use specific reasons and examples to support your recommendation 60
- TPO-33 - Integrated Writing Task Carved stone balls are a curious type of artifact found at a number of locations in Scotland. They date from the late Neolithic period, around 4,000 years ago. They are round in shape; they were carved from several types o 63
- 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 61
- Agree or disagree: Teaching is harder than it was in the past. 87
- TPO-42 - Independent Writing Task Workers are more satisfied when they have many different types of tasks to do during the workday than when they do similar tasks all day long.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 484, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: what's
...tmosphere. This is directly contradicts whats the passage indicates. Secondly, the...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 251, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'contradicted'.
Suggestion: contradicted
... reduced. This is another part where is contradict to the reading passage. Third, the p...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 99, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...able to compete with gasoline on price. However the speaker rejects this by explaining ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, third, while, such as, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
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: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1233.0 1373.03311258 90% => OK
No of words: 253.0 270.72406181 93% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87351778656 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98822939669 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52446356849 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 119.0 145.348785872 82% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.470355731225 0.540411800872 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 381.6 419.366225166 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.3162470626 49.2860985944 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 72.5294117647 110.228320801 66% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.8823529412 21.698381199 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.70588235294 7.06452816374 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
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: 0.460095873708 0.272083759551 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.159768300315 0.0996497079465 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.121037998786 0.0662205650399 183% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.281477478695 0.162205337803 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0949990037219 0.0443174109184 214% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.9 13.3589403974 67% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 65.73 53.8541721854 122% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 11.0289183223 69% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 10.37 12.2367328918 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.64 8.42419426049 91% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => Gunning_fog is low.
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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.