The reading and the lecture discuss whether ethanol fuel, made from plants, can be good alternative fuel sources. The author claims that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline and provides three reasons to support. On the other hand, the lecturer disagrees with the claim made in the article and refutes each of the author’s claims.
To begin with, the passage states that ethanol provides no environmental advantage over gasoline. However, the speaker claims that although ethanol, like gasoline, releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, ethanol-producing process actually reduces global warming. The speaker further explains that plants that used as sources of ethanol help reduce carbon dioxide by absorbing them.
Furthermore, the author cites that producing enough ethanol for population needs would significantly reduce the plants needed for feeding farm animals. This point is rebutted by the speaking. The lecturer said that the main resource for producing ethanol is part from plants that was not use as animal feeds. Therefore, producing ethanol would not damage farm animals industry.
Finally, the writer claims that ethanol’s price will not be economical or competitive compared to gasoline’s price in near future. This claim is challenge by the professor. The professor said that though government is subsidizing ethanol producers in the form of tax, ethanol price is likely to decrease once people starting to use more ethanol. He points out that researcher claim that if three times the population have used more ethanol, its price will decrease for 40%.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 360, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'animals'' or 'animal's'?
Suggestion: animals'; animal's
...producing ethanol would not damage farm animals industry. Finally, the writer claims t...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, finally, furthermore, however, if, so, therefore, to begin with, 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: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1355.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 246.0 270.72406181 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.5081300813 5.08290768461 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96035189615 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78894081896 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 145.348785872 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59756097561 0.540411800872 111% => OK
syllable_count: 419.4 419.366225166 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.7015010254 49.2860985944 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.7857142857 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5714285714 21.698381199 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.92857142857 7.06452816374 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.523492730931 0.272083759551 192% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.183572476676 0.0996497079465 184% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0949932913911 0.0662205650399 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.314893257056 0.162205337803 194% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0623928396662 0.0443174109184 141% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 53.8541721854 85% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.38 12.2367328918 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.