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 gasoline for several reasons.
First, the increased use of ethanol fuel would not help to solve one of the biggest environmental problems caused by gasoline use: global warming. Like gasoline, ethanol releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere when it is burned for fuel, and carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas: it helps trap heat in the atmosphere. Thus, ethanol offers no environmental advantage over gasoline.
Second, the production of significant amounts of ethanol would dramatically reduce the amount of plants available for uses other than fuel. For example, much of the corn now grown in the United States is used to feed farm animals such as cows and chickens. It is estimated that if ethanol were used to satisfy just 10 percent of the fuel needs in the United States, more than 60 percent of the corn currently grown in the United States would have to be used to produce ethanol. If most of the corn were used to produce ethanol, a substantial source of food for animals would disappear.
Third, ethanol fuel will never be able to compete with gasoline on price. Although the prices of ethanol and gasoline for the consumer are currently about the same, this is only because of the help—in the form of tax subsidies—given to ethanol producers by the United States government. These tax subsidies have cost the United States government over $11 billion in the past 30 years. If the United States government were to stop helping the producers in this way, the price of ethanol would increase greatly.
The lecture casts doubt on the passage that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline. Instead, the professor believes that ethanol fuel is a great replacing fuel for gasoline.
First of all, the passage claims that the increased use of ethanol fuel would not help to solve global warming. Since ethanol releases carbon dioxide when it is burned for fuel, and carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. However, the professor refutes the passage by arguing that burning ethanol will not add to global warming. This is because ethanol is made from plants, and plants can absorb carbon dioxide. Which counteract with carbon dioxide that released from burning ethanol.
Secondly, the passage states that the production of significant amounts of ethanol would dramatically reduce the amount of plants available for uses other than fuel. Yet the professor disagrees with the statement by mentioning that ethanol is usually made from cellulose, which is the part of a plant that animals do not eat. Thus, production of ethanol will not reduce animals' food supply.
Finally, the passage argues that ethanol fuel will never be able to compete with gasoline on price, because the price of ethanol is currently helped by the United States government. If the United States government stop helping the producers, the price of ethanol would increase greatly. Nevertheless, the professor denies the passage by pointing out that if there are enough people buying ethanol, ethanol will be able to compete with the gasoline on price. Since more production will lead to the decrease in price. And the professor cites a report study, which claims that if the production of ethanol grows three times more, the unit price of ethanol will drop forty percent.
- task1task2 E rater Both the reading passage and the lecture discuss the possible explanations of mass extinction in the Triassic period The passage proposes three explanations to account this phenomenon However the professor in the lecture casts doubt on 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Famous entertainers and athletes deserve to have more privacy than they have now Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 68
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Always telling the truth is the most important consideration in any relationship between people Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 90
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Students are more influenced by their teachers than by their friends Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 70
- The cane toad is a large 1 8 kg amphibian species native to Central and South America It was deliberately introduced to Australia in 1935 with the expectation that it would protect farmers crops by eating harmful insects Unfortunately the toad multiplied 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 409, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Which” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
..., and plants can absorb carbon dioxide. Which counteract with carbon dioxide that rel...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 459, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... to compete with the gasoline on price. Since more production will lead to the decrea...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, thus, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1462.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 284.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14788732394 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45325268175 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 145.348785872 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.485915492958 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 456.3 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.3333884297 49.2860985944 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.4666666667 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.9333333333 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.53333333333 7.06452816374 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.304325336662 0.272083759551 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120775372541 0.0996497079465 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0541418691305 0.0662205650399 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202010059355 0.162205337803 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0303098253446 0.0443174109184 68% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.59 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.98 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => 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.