Burning fossil fuels (coal, natural gas and oil) for energy purposes releases a gas called carbon dioxide (C02)into the atmosphere. The ever-increasing levels of Co2 in the atmosphere contribute to global warming and thus harm the environment. In order to combat global warming, scientists have proposed capturing CO2 from industrial facilities that use fossil fuels and storing it underground. The captured Co2 would be transported to storage sites and injected into deep underground rocks. However, there are several significant challenges that make it difficult to store CO2 underground.
Storage
First, there is the question of whether locations proposed for storing Co2 have enough space. The burning of fossil fuels around the world releases billions of tons of Co2 into the atmosphere annually. In order to make a considerable difference in combating global warming, most of the released Co2 would need to be captured and stored underground. It is not clear whether underground sites suitable for CO2 storage have enough space.
Health Risks
Second, if C02 escapes from underground storage sites, it can pose risks to human health. CO2 leaks may occur if, for example, unforeseen natural processes or forces create cracks in the ground above the storage site. Although the normal atmospheric levels of Co2 are harmless, high concentrations of Co2 may be unsafe, causing headaches, tiredness. and possibly even death.
High Costs
Finally, a wide range of costs are associated with the process of storing CO2 underground. First, new technologies for capturing and storing C02 that currently do not exist will have to be created. In addition, new infrastructure, such as pipelines transporting Co2 from industrial facilities to storage sites. will have to be built. All of these requirements will likely result in very high costs for constructing and operating CO2 storage systems.
The passage discusses the possibility of storing CO2 which makes a significant contribution to global warming but puts forward several challenges that make the process not practical. Whereas, the speaker comes up with solutions for each challenge.
First and foremost, The article explicitly states that finding such locations for storing CO2 which needs a large space difficult, On the other hand, the professor points out the fact that Gases including CO2 when are exposed to high pressure and temperature are transformed into liquid of which requires smaller space to storm. Therefore, finding a suitable location is out of the question.
Secondly, The writer presents the health risks that CO2 will expose if they are released from underground storage. The lecture, Conversely, Clears out that Some credible research has shown that CO2 stays close to the ground thereby people will not be affected unless they sleep on the ground, for example. moreover, the amount of CO2 could be monitored, hence alarming people nearby.
Last but not least, The author contends that storing CO2 involves both new technology and infrastructure which leads to making the process costly. In stark contrast, the speaker calls this contention into question. He refers to deep underground rocks containing methane, a precious gas that could be extracted by pulling CO2. As a result, it makes up for the expensive process of storing CO2.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 306, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Moreover
... they sleep on the ground, for example. moreover, the amount of CO2 could be monitored, ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, first, hence, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, whereas, for example, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1199.0 1373.03311258 87% => OK
No of words: 226.0 270.72406181 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30530973451 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.87727950738 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67943280736 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.646017699115 0.540411800872 120% => OK
syllable_count: 351.0 419.366225166 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => 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: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 77.5896176065 49.2860985944 157% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.0 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5454545455 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.8181818182 7.06452816374 167% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.124290078713 0.272083759551 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0461305062408 0.0996497079465 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.024128001258 0.0662205650399 36% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0733785319774 0.162205337803 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0212868559163 0.0443174109184 48% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.3589403974 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.52 8.42419426049 113% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.