tp09 the arguments of the advantages of hydrogen fuel-cell engines
The lecture apparently refutes the point illustrated in the reading material. According to the professor, though it is correct that petroleum is quite polluting, the reading is too optimistic about the future of hydrogen fuel-cell engines. On the contrary, the reading contends an opposite stands that there are several advantages of hydrogen fuel-cell engines that will one day replace the internal combustion engines.
The first point the professor uses to cast doubt on the reading is that the hydrogen demand to pass through a complex process to form pure liquid stage and store them in extremely cold temperature since naturally formed hydrogen is not directly usable, which differs from the statement in the reading is that the internal combustion engine relies on petroleum which is a finite resource, by contrast, hydrogen for fuel-cell engines will never run out since it is quite common to be found in our atmosphere.
Another evidence the speaker adopts to contradict the passage is that forming pure hydrogen requires a tremendous amount of energy from burning coal or oil. Although the engine itself does not pollute the environment, the factories that provide the hydrogen do pollute the surroundings. However, the reading states that hydrogen fuel-cell engines can solve the problem of pollution owing to their clean byproduct which is water.
In conclusion, the point made in the reading contrasts with what is presented in the reading. As the professor claims, the manufacturing of the engine is quite expensive due to the demand for a particular metal that cannot be replaced by other cheaper materials previously, whereas the reading material holds that the engine will be economically competitive because it is twice as efficient as the internal combustion engine, yet requires less fuel energy.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, first, however, if, so, whereas, in conclusion, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1537.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 288.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33680555556 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76505550128 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.552083333333 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 481.5 419.366225166 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 32.0 21.2450331126 151% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 132.864267507 49.2860985944 270% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 170.777777778 110.228320801 155% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.0 21.698381199 147% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.33333333333 7.06452816374 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.303223118486 0.272083759551 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.127591705239 0.0996497079465 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0968214152384 0.0662205650399 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.192178739677 0.162205337803 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0677466546426 0.0443174109184 153% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.7 13.3589403974 147% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.54 53.8541721854 57% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.0 11.0289183223 154% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.28 12.2367328918 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.72 8.42419426049 115% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 63.6247240618 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.498013245 141% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.