The article stats that ethanol is not a good replacement to gasoline and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor explains that the ethanol can be a good alternative for gasoline and refutes each of the author’s reasons.
First, the reading asserts that ethanol can not solve the global warming. Ethanol release carbon dioxide when burning like gasoline and it cannot reduce global warming phenomena. The professor refutes this point by stating that using of ethanol can reduce the carbon dioxide due to planting more corn. He says that ethanol can be made by corn or other plants and increasing in planting will diminish the carbon dioxide because the plants use carbon dioxide in air and release oxygen.
Second, the article claims that using ethanol will lead to decrease animal food and available plants. Conversely, the lecture explains that for producing ethanol another alternative is cellulose. The cellulose is impossible for eating and it is useful to plant cellulose instead of plant which animals eat. Therefore, using ethanol do not reduce the arability of animal food.
Finally, the author stats that ethanol will never be able to compete with gasoline on price. In contrast, the professor explicates that ethanol able to compete with gasoline in terms of price due to a simple rule in producing and consuming. The lecture gives a support for ethanol pricing and says that if production of ethanol increase, the price will be reduce due to promote consuming.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 400, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...and increasing in planting will diminish the carbon dioxide because the plants us...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, finally, first, however, if, second, so, therefore, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1263.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 243.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.1975308642 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94822203886 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52822975068 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 118.0 145.348785872 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.485596707819 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 410.4 419.366225166 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.7867257955 49.2860985944 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.1538461538 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6923076923 21.698381199 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.76923076923 7.06452816374 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 4.45695364238 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.482668020414 0.272083759551 177% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.197387389913 0.0996497079465 198% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0436509078426 0.0662205650399 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.295968863747 0.162205337803 182% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0376155544328 0.0443174109184 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 53.8541721854 83% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.88 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.97 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.