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 halfthe fuel energy that the internal-combustion powered car does to go the same distance
The reading excerpt states that fuel-cell engines have several advantages over internal combustion engines which is the main source of car power and will probably soon replace them, the author provides three reasons for support. However, the lecturer' audio states that there are a lot of problems with the author theories and she refutes each of them by stating the cause of using the fuel-cell engines is not obvious.
To begin with, the article claims that one of the main problems with the internal combustion engine is that it relies on petroleum which is a finite resource, while the fuel-cell utilize easily available, renewable resources. In contrast, the professor contradicts this theory and says that this new source not easily available because it uses the hydrogen which is found in water and could not be used directly. Moreover, it should be obtained as a pure liquid state as an artificial substance. Thus, it requires cooling technology because it must be very very cold to gain this substance that they need to produce energy. Thus, this point of view opposes what the professor explained.
Second, the passage posits that hydrogen-based fuel cells are attractive because they will solve many of the world pollution problems as the by-product is only water unlike the petroleum which it's by-product is the carbon dioxide and it is very harmful. On the other hand, the lecturer argues this outlook and explains that the production of the hydrogen that is needed for these engines will produce a high percentage of pollution because the purification process will require a lot of energy such as coal and oil which is very harmful to the environment. So, this solution is not credited to these new engines.
Third, the excerpt mentions that these new engines will be economically competitive because people will spend less money to operate a fuel-cell engine. This cast doubt, on what the professor explained that he asserts that the manufacturing of the fuel engines needs very expensive metal because without these engines the hydrogen cannot pass through the reaction to produce energy. Consequently, this outlook contradicts what the lecturer discussed.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 554, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: very
...s cooling technology because it must be very very cold to gain this substance that they n...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, however, if, look, moreover, second, so, third, thus, while, in contrast, such as, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 22.412803532 165% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1828.0 1373.03311258 133% => OK
No of words: 353.0 270.72406181 130% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17847025496 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33454660006 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62566960462 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 145.348785872 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.521246458924 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 569.7 419.366225166 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => 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: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 21.2450331126 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 78.4600301514 49.2860985944 159% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.615384615 110.228320801 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1538461538 21.698381199 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.92307692308 7.06452816374 140% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.159432575022 0.272083759551 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0521373876791 0.0996497079465 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0672516056154 0.0662205650399 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10127578007 0.162205337803 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0529177248236 0.0443174109184 119% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 13.3589403974 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 53.8541721854 82% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.0289183223 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.0 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 63.6247240618 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.0 10.7273730684 158% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.498013245 122% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.2008830022 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.