vegetable oil as fuel
In the reading, the author says that using vegetable oil as a fuel for cars can’t be a good idea and it provides several reasons for that. The professor, however, disagrees and shows that vegetable oil is a good source of fuel by arguing her own reasons.
First, the reading says that using vegetable oil as fuel is costly since the conversion equipment needed for the car to run on vegetable oil is expensive, and also, it is prone to high maintenance, the professor rejects this point and says that the higher fuel economy of a vegetable oil car will soon compensate for the extra cost of equipment.
Next, the reading claims that using the equipment demands extra attention for the driver since it needs to be switched on and off on every drive. Again, the professor disagrees. According to her, switching the equipment on and off cannot be a tough task and the driver will soon get used it. Moreover, she claims that in the early future this mechanism will get fully automated so the driver’s extra attention won’t be required.
The last point in the reading is that using food crops for vegetable oil production, which is mostly the case, can result in shortage of food crops. Therefore, by increasing the demand for vegetable oil in transportation, the price of foods using this oil, such as salad dressings and French fries, could rise significantly. However, the lecturer argues that the vegetable oil is produced out of waste products of restaurants and chips factories rather than the food crops. So he believes the increased use of vegetable oil won’t interrupt food supply.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-10-20 | Hello GRE | 83 | view |
| 2023-08-17 | YasamanEsml | 80 | view |
| 2023-08-17 | YasamanEsml | 78 | view |
| 2023-02-27 | zaid | 83 | view |
| 2023-01-16 | janfaisal | 80 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 346, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ensate for the extra cost of equipment. Next, the reading claims that using the ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, in short, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1342.0 1373.03311258 98% => OK
No of words: 273.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91575091575 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70565330042 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509157509158 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 404.1 419.366225166 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.661499638 49.2860985944 149% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.0 110.228320801 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8181818182 21.698381199 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.18181818182 7.06452816374 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.426072751109 0.272083759551 157% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.173346270878 0.0996497079465 174% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.152545784799 0.0662205650399 230% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.294121179083 0.162205337803 181% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.178566123367 0.0443174109184 403% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.07 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 10.7273730684 177% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.