Wave-energy as an alternative energy
The lecturer argues that the advantages of wave-energy is dilusional. This contradicts the reading passage’s claim that wave-energy is the alternative energy in the future. However, the lecturer challenges the statement by suggesting several counter examples.
First, according to the lecturer, the wave-energy has a disruption problem. The wave-energy facilities has a technical problems such as constant break down issues, and it is easily fluctuated. This casts doubt on the reading passage’s claim that wave-energy is a reliable.
Next, the lecturer illustrates that because of the wave-energy facilities, there could be harmful chemicals leacking in the ocean. To be specific, turbines help to generate the facilities, but it can be harmful and have negative effects. This counters the reading passage’s claim that the wave-energy is eco-friendly because it dose not emit to the atmosphere and comtaminate the ocean.
Finally, the lecturer accuse that wave-energy facilities has negative effect on the landscape. Because to make the facilities visible, it has to be painted in bright color. Therefore, this makes it easy to see at the shore. This refutes the reading passage’s claim that the wave-energy facilities don’t have negative impact of the surrounding landscape because it is small, floating in the ocean, and it is below the surface, so it is hard to be noticeable.
In conclusion, while the reading passage claims that the wave-energy facilities are one of the best choice for the future alternative energy, the listening passage refutes the claim by stating a few opposing examples.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-07-14 | Jeong-eum Cha | 60 | view |
| 2022-07-14 | Jeong-eum Cha | 60 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 120, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'problem'?
Suggestion: problem
... wave-energy facilities has a technical problems such as constant break down issues, and...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 329, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'doses'?
Suggestion: doses
... wave-energy is eco-friendly because it dose not emit to the atmosphere and comtamin...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, so, therefore, while, as to, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => 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: 1374.0 1373.03311258 100% => OK
No of words: 248.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.54032258065 5.08290768461 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96837696647 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10816746569 2.5805825403 120% => OK
Unique words: 121.0 145.348785872 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.487903225806 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 431.1 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => 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: 52.6042211389 49.2860985944 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.1428571429 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7142857143 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.07142857143 7.06452816374 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.405661077073 0.272083759551 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.184018679907 0.0996497079465 185% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.141141609486 0.0662205650399 213% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.275904908104 0.162205337803 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.106595586784 0.0443174109184 241% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 13.3589403974 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.76 53.8541721854 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.56 12.2367328918 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.