Whether hydrogen fuel-cell engines are better substitute for internal-combustion engines or not?
The professor controverts all the points that have been made by the author of the reading passage. The reading discusses in favor of using fuel-cell engines and replacing internal-combustion engines with them; however, the lecturer discredits all the main arguments presented in the reading by giving examples of some difficulties associated with fuel-cell engines.
First and foremost, the author of the reading asserts that internal-combustion engines depend on petroleum to a great extent, and petroleum is going to finish someday. He/she also states that the hydrogen is available anywhere, even in the combination of water. In contrast, the lecturer opposes with this issue due to the fact that hydrogen, needed for engines, is not easily accessible. She also states that in order to obtain hydrogen the scientists have to keep it in liquid form in a very cold temperature. Consequently, this process both requires high technology, and is not practical.
Furthermore, the reading holds the view that by utilizing hydrogen in fuel-cell engines, the problem of the environment being polluted can be solved. On the contrary, the Professor argues that this statement is not accurate. She mentions that producing pure hydrogen requires lots of energy which only can be provided by burning oils and coals, and so on. As a result, in either types of engines the environment will be polluted by either factories or cars.
Eventually, the reading passage contends that fuel-cell engines are more inexpensive than the internal-combustion engines because they are twice as efficient as the internal-combustion engines. However, the speaker, disagrees and disputes that since fuel-cell engines require Platinum in order to run, and Platinum is an exceedingly expensive substance; therefore, the fuel-cell engines could not be inexpensive than ordinary engines.
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'consequently', 'first', 'furthermore', 'however', 'if', 'so', 'therefore', 'in contrast', 'as a result', 'on the contrary', 'to a great extent']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.241379310345 0.261695866417 92% => OK
Verbs: 0.15987460815 0.158904122519 101% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0689655172414 0.0723426182421 95% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0721003134796 0.0435111971325 166% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0156739811912 0.0277247811725 57% => OK
Prepositions: 0.137931034483 0.128828473217 107% => OK
Participles: 0.0532915360502 0.0370669169778 144% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.23209893525 2.5805825403 125% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0188087774295 0.0208969081088 90% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.00154638098197 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.122257053292 0.128158765124 95% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.012539184953 0.0158828679856 79% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00626959247649 0.0114777025283 55% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1861.0 1645.83664459 113% => OK
No of words: 285.0 271.125827815 105% => OK
Chars per words: 6.5298245614 6.08160592843 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.04852973271 101% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.435087719298 0.374372842146 116% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.368421052632 0.287516216867 128% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.280701754386 0.187439937562 150% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.182456140351 0.113142543107 161% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.23209893525 2.5805825403 125% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.533333333333 0.539623497131 99% => OK
Word variations: 53.6041265472 53.8517498576 100% => OK
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0529801325 100% => OK
Sentence length: 21.9230769231 21.7502111507 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.2165921163 49.3711431718 118% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.153846154 132.220823453 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9230769231 21.7502111507 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.923076923077 0.878197800319 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.39072847682 0% => OK
Readability: 58.7651821862 50.5018328374 116% => OK
Elegance: 1.74683544304 1.90840788429 92% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.241765841572 0.549887131256 44% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.127369470872 0.142949733639 89% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0806217896253 0.0787303798458 102% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.613382735565 0.631733273073 97% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.160077244205 0.139662658121 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.11059027634 0.266732575781 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.10034982236 0.103435571967 97% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.377845885396 0.414875509568 91% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0240290606911 0.0530846634433 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.188280453857 0.40443939384 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.10070332836 0.0528353158467 191% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.26048565121 94% => OK
Positive topic words: 4.0 3.49668874172 114% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 3.62251655629 110% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 3.1766004415 94% => OK
Total topic words: 11.0 10.2958057395 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 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.