Car manufacturers and governments have been eagerly seeking a replacement for the automobile's main source of power, the internal-combustion engine. By far the most promising alternative source of energy for cars is the hydrogen-based fuel-cell engine, which uses hydrogen to create electricity that, in turn, powers the car. Fuel-cell engines have several advantages over internal-combustion engines and will probably soon replace them.
One of the main problems with the internal-combustion engine is that it relies on petroleum, either in the form of gasoline or diesel fuel. Petroleum is a finite resource; someday, we will run out of oil. The hydrogen needed for fuel-cell engines cannot easily be depleted. Hydrogen can be derived from various plentiful sources, including natural gas and even water. The fact that fuel-cell engines utilize easily available, renewable resources makes them particularly attractive.
Second, hydrogen-based fuel cells are attractive because they will solve many of the world's pollution problems. An unavoidable by-product of burning oil is carbon dioxide, and carbon dioxide harms the environment. On the other hand, the only byproduct of fuel-cell engines is water.
Third, fuel-cell engines will soon be economically competitive because people will spend less money to operate a fuel-cell engine than they will to operate an internal-combustion engine. This is true for one simple reason: a fuel-cell automobile is nearly twice as efficient in using its fuel as an automobile powered by an internal-combustion engine is. In other words, the fuel-cell powered car requires only half the fuel energy that the internal-combustion powered car does to go the same distance.
The reading states that the manufacturer and government seeking fuel cell engines in alternative of internal combustion engines. It has provides there supporting ideas in order to buttress its position. However, the lecturer found reasonable doubts on the reading claims and opines the possible source of hydrogen fuel will not a discreet choice. She refutes each of the reading reason.
First, the passage states in fuel engine the source of hydrogen is infinite. The professor denies this proposition. She says although the origin of hydrogen is limitless but the usable form of hydrogen is not directly available. Moreover, it is technologically difficult to get the active version of hydrogen.
Second, the reading asserts by using hydrogen fuel the pollution of the environment will downgrade. However, the lecturer doubts and refutes this position. She discloses hydrogen will not solve the pollution rather it will enhance the pollution. Because during the production of hydrogen the factories are producing many substances that will make the atmosphere more polluted.
Third, the passage claims hydrogen fuel use will be economical and cost effective. The proposition is quite problematic with the professor position. She states using hydrogen fuel will be charged more money because engine in the car required platinum in order to use hydrogen fuel.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 247, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” 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.
...n rather it will enhance the pollution. Because during the production of hydrogen the f...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, moreover, second, so, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 12.0772626932 17% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 22.412803532 54% => OK
Preposition: 21.0 30.3222958057 69% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.01324503311 259% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1160.0 1373.03311258 84% => OK
No of words: 210.0 270.72406181 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.52380952381 5.08290768461 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.80675409584 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79975703513 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 113.0 145.348785872 78% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.538095238095 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 365.4 419.366225166 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.6410784136 49.2860985944 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 77.3333333333 110.228320801 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.0 21.698381199 65% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.46666666667 7.06452816374 49% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.196847090667 0.272083759551 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0685772982353 0.0996497079465 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0914366245701 0.0662205650399 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127925599572 0.162205337803 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0553577726587 0.0443174109184 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.3589403974 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 48.81 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.14 12.2367328918 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.92 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.