Asteroids are large space objects made of rock and ice. There are hundreds of thousands of asteroids in our solar system. Though we often hear ideas about establishing colonies of humans to live and work on our Moon or our neighboring planet, Mars, some think that sending people to an asteroid would actually be the best colonization option for a number of reasons.
Low Gravity
To begin with, asteroids are often much smaller than planets, so they have lower gravity. When landing a spaceship, the craft would not be pulled as strongly or as forcefully toward the asteroid’s surface, making the landing safer than landing on the Moon or Mars; it would also allow a spacecraft to carry much more equipment needed to set up the colony. It would also be easier for the spacecraft to take off again, so the spaceship would need to carry considerably less fuel for the trip back to Earth.
Mining Valuable Metals
Next, some asteroids are rich in valuable elements and precious metals that are relatively rare on Earth, such as gold and platinum. An asteroid colony would be extremely profitable and a good source of these raw materials. The colonists or businesses sponsoring them could more than pay for the cost of their support by mining minerals and sending them back to Earth.
Easy to Reach
Finally, asteroids are a good option for colonization because some of them would be very easy to reach. There are a number of asteroids that periodically come within or near Earth’s orbit. Some of them actually get closer to Earth than our Moon. So these asteroids would be much easier and more affordable to get to and get back from than a planet like Mars, which would require a two-year trip in each direction.
Recently, there's been heated discussions about whether asteroids would be the best colonization option. While the author in the reading proposes three advantages of making asteroids the colonization places, the lecturer, on the other hand, disagrees with its reliabilities.
First of all, as author mentions that low gravity helps spaceships land and take off easier, the lecturer presents other risks to refuse it. It is seen from the astronauts working in the low-gravity space that their health problems arise. Since the muscle mass and the bone density decrease as being in the low-gravity environment, it poses serious threat to humans if they are to live on the asteroids in the long run. Thus, the lecturer believes it is impractical to make asteroids a colonization option.
Next, the author contends the profits earned by the valuable metals can be of great help to mining and transporting the metals. In the contrary, the lecturer points out that there are variable factors that are indeed intervened. That is to say, the price of the metals may not be as priceless as expected. Consequently, it is not pragmatic to assert the benefits of living on the asteroids.
Ultimately, the reading argues that some asteroids are near Earth so that it's convenient to reach, to which cuts down the price and time coming back and forth. Nevertheless, the lecture suggests the situation mentioned by the author is often unusual. Since the asteroids may be close to Earth for one moments, they do not stay and even travel farther away than Mars. In a result, the lecturer refutes the author's opinion in the convenience of short distance.
There is obvious divide between the lecturer and the author.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 11, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: there's
Recently, theres been heated discussions about whether a...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 298, Rule ID: ONE_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use the numeral 'one' with plural words. Did you mean 'one moment', 'a moment', or simply 'moments'?
Suggestion: one moment; a moment; moments
...the asteroids may be close to Earth for one moments, they do not stay and even travel farth...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 406, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
.... In a result, the lecturer refutes the authors opinion in the convenience of short dis...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, if, may, nevertheless, so, thus, while, first of all, on the other hand, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1427.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 281.0 270.72406181 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07829181495 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09427095027 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7466394129 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5871886121 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 433.8 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
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: 34.5778349043 49.2860985944 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.1333333333 110.228320801 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7333333333 21.698381199 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.2 7.06452816374 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0965247833324 0.272083759551 35% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0309314903934 0.0996497079465 31% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0281992698108 0.0662205650399 43% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.046548414684 0.162205337803 29% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0334184189454 0.0443174109184 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.