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.
The reading passage explores the issue of sending people to asteroids to be the best option, and several reasons are offered in support of this argument. Although the statement seems plausible in the beginning, the lecturer casts doubts on it for several reasons.
First of all, even though the reading passage suggests that due to the relatively low gravity on asteroids, it allows spaceships to land and take off easier. In contrast, the lecturer argues that though this may seem to be an advantage, the low gravity can also cause humans to suffer from serious health problems such as the reduction of muscle mass and bone density. Therefore, the lecturer' s argument disproves the counterpart in the reading.
Secondly, the statement held by the writer claims that mining the valuable elements and precious metals such as gold and platinum can be extremely profitable. However, the lecturer rejects the idea by bringing up a logical reason that though it may seem beneficial, the cost of colonizing and the transportation of metals can still cost a fortune. Besides, if the amount of valuable metal is found is large, then due to the increase in supply, the price will certainly decrease.
Last but not least, the lecturer acutely identifies the weakness in the reading passage that asteroids are much easier to achieve than the Moon or Mars, which is because of the distance can be shorter. The lecturer convincingly points out that though it may be achievable to go to an asteroid, the asteroids will not stay close to the Earth constantly. In short, going to the asteroids can be easy, however, it might be challenging to leave.
In conclusion, based on the evidence presented above, it can be clearly seen that the stances between both sides are paradoxical. Though the contents in the reading passage seem reasonable, the lecturer disproves them by solid evidence.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 433, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'leaving'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'challenge' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: leaving
... easy, however, it might be challenging to leave. In conclusion, based on the evidenc...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, in conclusion, in contrast, in short, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1572.0 1373.03311258 114% => OK
No of words: 312.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03846153846 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70205804633 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551282051282 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 477.0 419.366225166 114% => 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
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.0487868161 49.2860985944 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.923076923 110.228320801 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.5384615385 7.06452816374 163% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0732886924232 0.272083759551 27% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0274159369966 0.0996497079465 28% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0287822380651 0.0662205650399 43% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0395808290246 0.162205337803 24% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0298072241291 0.0443174109184 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.3589403974 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.03 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 63.6247240618 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => 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.