Both the reading and the speaker discuss whether Fuel-cell engines can replace internal combustion engine from different perspectives. The speaker seems to negate all the ideas that the author of the reading has mentioned.
First of all, the author of the reading points out that there are a variety of resources to make Fuel-cell engines, such as natural gas and even water. This point is challenged by the speaker. He restates the fact that people cannot produce the Fuel-cell engines directly from water of gas. They have to store and purify them in highly artificial substances. Therefore, it is very difficult process.
Secondly, the author of the reading contends that Fuel-cell engines can solve the world's pollution problems since the vehicles, which use the Fuel-cell engines operate by water. The speaker rebuts this idea by saying that to make the Fuel-cell engines, people have to burn oils and gases. Therefore, even though the vehicles do not pollute the environment, the process of making the Fuel-cell engines in the factories emit a lot of wastes into the air.
Finally, the author of the reading states that people can save money by using the Fuel-cell engines. The speaker, on the other hand, opposes this idea by saying that people cannot make the Fuel-cell engines without platinum component. Meanwhile, platinum is very expensive. Hence, it is not cheap at all.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 83, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'worlds'' or 'world's'?
Suggestion: worlds'; world's
...ds that Fuel-cell engines can solve the worlds pollution problems since the vehicles, ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, hence, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, such as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1162.0 1373.03311258 85% => OK
No of words: 227.0 270.72406181 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.11894273128 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.88156143495 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51112914177 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 124.0 145.348785872 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.546255506608 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 354.6 419.366225166 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.7921200063 49.2860985944 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.0 110.228320801 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.2142857143 21.698381199 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06452816374 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.419963589831 0.272083759551 154% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.147759176124 0.0996497079465 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.133325139066 0.0662205650399 201% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.286962698148 0.162205337803 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0685253507131 0.0443174109184 155% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.8 13.3589403974 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.12 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.12 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 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.