According to the passage, ethanol is not an appropriate alternative to gasoline since it has three main drawbacks. On the contrary, from the lecturer’s point of view, ethanol is a good alternative for gasoline and the lecturer finds the reasons expressed by the passage unconvincing.
First, burning ethanol releases carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, which contributes to the global warming. However, the lecturer believes that although burning ethanol releases carbon dioxide, it does not lead to global warming. He explains that ethanol is made up of corn which is a growing plant. Since all growing plants absorb carbon dioxide as their nutrients, using ethanol would decrease the total amount of carbon dioxide.
Second, based on the predictions, the passage asserts that the amount of food available for animals would significantly decrease as a result of ethanol production, which is mainly based on corn. On the other hand, the lecturer explains that ethanol is produced from the parts of the plants which are not used as food by animals. Therefore, production of ethanol would not lead to the reduction of animals’ food source.
Third, ethanol price is much higher than gasoline price in the absence of government support in terms of tax subsidies. Nevertheless, the lecturer states that ethanol would be able to compete with gasoline in term of price in future, without the need for government subsidies. He explains that if more people buy ethanol, the increase in production level leads to a drop in production costs. For example, if the production level of ethanol becomes three-fold greater than the recent production level, the production costs would decrease by 40 percent.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 224, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
... compete with gasoline in term of price in future, without the need for government subsid...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, third, for example, as a result, on the contrary, 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 : 1.0 7.30242825607 14% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 22.412803532 49% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1443.0 1373.03311258 105% => OK
No of words: 271.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32472324723 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05734859645 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8335879614 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 137.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.505535055351 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 439.2 419.366225166 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.552006637 49.2860985944 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.0 110.228320801 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8461538462 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.92307692308 7.06452816374 140% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 4.45695364238 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.458619938466 0.272083759551 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.179000375078 0.0996497079465 180% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0423733350288 0.0662205650399 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.273502055372 0.162205337803 169% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0485575933946 0.0443174109184 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.