The reading passage states that the pros of replacing the internal combustion engine by a hydrogen-based fuel cell. However, the professor cast doubt on each idea of the author presented in the passage.
First and foremost, the passage suggests that the fuel cell engine has plentiful resources such as natural gas and water while the former one based on only oil which is limited. On the other hand, the lecturer argued that the hydrogen is not available because when it is prepared to produce, it must be the pure liquid that is difficult to store. She also gave an example that the product of the hydrogen must be in extremely low temperature- a minus 250 Celsius.
Secondly, the reading indicates that carbon dioxide which is the product of internal combustion engine harm the environment a lot, but if people use hydrogen based engine the problem about pollution will disappear. In contrast, the professor made a counterclaim to this point by explaining that the rate of carbon dioxide which produced from the production of a pure liquid is equivalent or may outweigh to the amount of carbon dioxide from the former engine.
Thirdly and finally, the article claims the hydrogen-based fuel cell engine is twice as efficient as the internal combustion engine and also require less money to operate. Nonetheless, the lecturer rejected this by saying the hydrogen need an expensive and rare metal called platinum to become active for a chemical reaction. According to her, the fuel cell engine would cost more than the former one because of the producing stage.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 204, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...of the author presented in the passage. First and foremost, the passage suggests...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, while, in contrast, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1319.0 1373.03311258 96% => OK
No of words: 261.0 270.72406181 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05363984674 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0193898071 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66081402934 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551724137931 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 420.3 419.366225166 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 26.0 21.2450331126 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 47.5373537337 49.2860985944 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.9 110.228320801 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.1 21.698381199 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 14.2 7.06452816374 201% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.475172018779 0.272083759551 175% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.182162972169 0.0996497079465 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.142035181647 0.0662205650399 214% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.277217610697 0.162205337803 171% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0722528205877 0.0443174109184 163% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 53.8541721854 84% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.31 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.8 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 64.0 63.6247240618 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.498013245 118% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.