Based on the reading material, it is stated that there are 3 viable reasons for critics to reject ethanol as a replacement for gasoline. However, the lecturer finds this idea bereft of sufficient reasoning and presents some ideas to the contrary.
Initially, the author argued that the use of ethanol as a substitute for gasoline would not be a good solution for global warming. That being said, the lecturer repudiated this idea by clarifying that the use of ethanol will not increase the amount of global warming. Ethanol is made of plants, like corn and sugar cane, and plants absorb carbon dioxide from the athmosphere in order to photosynthesis. By planting more corn and sugar cane, more carbon dioxide can be absorbed from the atmosphere and thus, the amount of global warming can be managed.
Another point mentioned by the author was that the production of ethanol would decrease dramatically the amount of plants available for animals. However, the lecturer rejected this one too by stating that ethanol can be produced by cellulose, a combination of plant cell walls. The cellulose is not eaten by animals. So, by producing ethanol from cellulose, the amount of plants for feeding animals would not been declined.
The final point advanced in the reading passage was that ethanol will never be able to compete with gasoline in price, and if the US government stop tax subsidies, the price of ethanol will increase. Yet again, the lecturer casted doubt on this idea. He said that as the production of ethanol will be increased in the future, it will be more available and its price will be decreased. Thus, in the future, people can expect that the price of ethanol will drop by 40 percents, because the use of ethanol will be increased three times.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, so, thus, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 5.04856512141 297% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1464.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 299.0 270.72406181 110% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89632107023 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58010227992 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.478260869565 0.540411800872 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 468.0 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.8803108453 49.2860985944 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.571428571 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3571428571 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.0 7.06452816374 28% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.472321939 0.272083759551 174% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.176959945911 0.0996497079465 178% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101333987084 0.0662205650399 153% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.286332086619 0.162205337803 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0713146820156 0.0443174109184 161% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.32 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.