Ethanol fuel, made from plants such as corn and sugar cane, has been advocated by some people as an alternative to gasoline in the United States. However, many critics argue that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline for several reasons
The reading passage and the lecture are about ethanol fuel, which is made from corn plant. The passage declares that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline by providing three reasons. On the other hand, the lecturer challenges the claims made by the author and mentions that all three reasons are not convincing.
The author posits that ethanol would not solve the biggest environmental problem that is global warming. He mentions that ethanol releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere when burned for fuel. The professor, on the other hand, rebuts by mentioning that ethanol is a good alternative for gasoline. Although it releases co2 on burning yet, it helps in the reduction of greenhouse gas since it is made of plants and more corns need to be planted to supply the ethanol. Therefore, every growing plant removes CO2.
Secondly, the text mentions that significant use of the plant for ethanol production would reduce other use like feeding animals rather than the fuel. Corns are planted in the States to feed cows and chicken, thus a substantial source of food for animals would disappear if are used in ethanol. The lecturer contradicts by pointing out that ethanol is made from cellulose, a part of the plant that is not eaten by animals and is often left out as waste. Therefore, the availability of food for animals would not be affected at any cost.
At last, the professor asserts that the price of ethanol is the same as gasoline and if the United States government were to stop the helping producers, its price would be rocket shooting. However, the professor denied by stating that price of ethanol would decline if more people would purchase it, thereby more demands thus more of its production consequently decline in the price would notice.
The professor and the reading hold conflicting views on each other.
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, 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: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1540.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 310.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96774193548 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54896685933 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 145.348785872 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496774193548 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 479.7 419.366225166 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: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.9678403603 49.2860985944 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.666666667 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6666666667 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.86666666667 7.06452816374 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.315803948167 0.272083759551 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.115717525464 0.0996497079465 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0736580983591 0.0662205650399 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.161303776784 0.162205337803 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.100819550795 0.0443174109184 227% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, 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: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1540.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 310.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96774193548 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.54896685933 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 145.348785872 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496774193548 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 479.7 419.366225166 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: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.9678403603 49.2860985944 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.666666667 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6666666667 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.86666666667 7.06452816374 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.315803948167 0.272083759551 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.115717525464 0.0996497079465 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0736580983591 0.0662205650399 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.161303776784 0.162205337803 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.100819550795 0.0443174109184 227% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.