Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they oppose the specific points made in the reading passage.
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.
First, the increased use of ethanol fuel would not help to solve one of the biggest environmental problems caused by gasoline use: global warming. Like gasoline, ethanol releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere when it is burned for fuel, and carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas: it helps trap heat in the atmosphere. Thus, ethanol offers no environmental advantage over gasoline.
Second, the production of significant amounts of ethanol would dramatically reduce the amount of plants available for uses other than fuel. For example, much of the corn now grown in the United States is used to feed farm animals such as cows and chickens. It is estimated that if ethanol were used to satisfy just 10 percent of the fuel needs in the United States, more than 60 percent of the corn currently grown in the United States would have to be used to produce ethanol. If most of the corn were used to produce ethanol, a substantial source of food for animals would disappear.
Third, ethanol fuel will never be able to compete with gasoline on price. Although the prices of ethanol and gasoline for the consumer are currently about the same, this is only because of the help—in the form of tax subsidies—given to ethanol producers by the United States government. These tax subsidies have cost the United States government over $11 billion in the past 30 years. If the United States government were to stop helping the producers in this way, the price of ethanol would increase greatly.
The reading and the lecture are both about the advantages and disadvantages of a new kind of fuel, ethanol fuel. The author provides 3 theories about why ethanol is not a good replacement for traditional fuels. The lecture challenges the claims made by the author. His opinion is that will replace gasoline gradually in the future.
To begin with, the author claims the atmosphere will be harmed by the wide use of ethanol. It argues that burning this fuel will realize a huge amount of greenhouse gas. The lecture rebuts this argument. He suggests the processes of producing ethanol is actually absorbing carbon dioxide because plants like corn need carbon dioxide to grow up. He argues that rather than realize greenhouse gas, the use of ethanol is helping to solve environmental problems.
Second, the author states that there will be less food to feed farm animals due to the production of ethanol. The lecture rebuts the argument. He thinks some of the plants which will be used to producing ethanol are not suitable for animals to eat.
Last, the author mentions that the cost of producing ethanol is rather high, and the price will increase without the help of the government. The lecture, on the other hand, feels that the high price of ethanol will go down as the increasing producing of ethanol.
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 212, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...good replacement for traditional fuels. The lecture challenges the claims made by t...
^^^
Line 5, column 154, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
... lecture rebuts the argument. He thinks some of the plants which will be used to producing ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, second, so, kind of, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1092.0 1373.03311258 80% => OK
No of words: 223.0 270.72406181 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.89686098655 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.86434787811 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51943719822 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 120.0 145.348785872 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.538116591928 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 338.4 419.366225166 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.0702305869 49.2860985944 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 78.0 110.228320801 71% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.9285714286 21.698381199 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.85714285714 7.06452816374 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.150408327226 0.272083759551 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0590746188805 0.0996497079465 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0434254197354 0.0662205650399 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0945629519964 0.162205337803 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0431348206869 0.0443174109184 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.6 13.3589403974 72% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 53.8541721854 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 11.0289183223 73% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.84 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.43 8.42419426049 88% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 63.6247240618 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.7273730684 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 212, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...good replacement for traditional fuels. The lecture challenges the claims made by t...
^^^
Line 5, column 154, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
... lecture rebuts the argument. He thinks some of the plants which will be used to producing ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, second, so, kind of, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1092.0 1373.03311258 80% => OK
No of words: 223.0 270.72406181 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.89686098655 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.86434787811 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51943719822 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 120.0 145.348785872 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.538116591928 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 338.4 419.366225166 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.0702305869 49.2860985944 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 78.0 110.228320801 71% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.9285714286 21.698381199 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.85714285714 7.06452816374 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.150408327226 0.272083759551 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0590746188805 0.0996497079465 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0434254197354 0.0662205650399 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0945629519964 0.162205337803 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0431348206869 0.0443174109184 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.6 13.3589403974 72% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 53.8541721854 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 11.0289183223 73% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.84 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.43 8.42419426049 88% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 63.6247240618 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.7273730684 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.