呃 现在头比较晕哈,呃 可以明天写综合吗, 明天要去上课,大概晚上8点左右会写好吧, 麻烦我的partner了~ 今天出门了 表示有点累, 批准我先睡吧
综合占楼先
这篇独立写的我觉得很挫和很诡异的感觉 啊啊啊~ 先睡个 明早还得6点起
Thepassage apparently state that the hydrogen-based fuel-cell engines will takeplace of internal-combustion engines for 3 reasons: avoid wasting fuelresources, prevent pollution problems and save money. But the professor disputesit. She does not agree what the passage said and she uses 3 specific points tosupport her idea.
Firstof all, the passage suppose that the internal-combustion engine relies onpetroleum which is a finite resource, we will run out of it at the end. Buthydrogen can be derived from natural gas even water, we don't have to worryabout exhausting it. In contrast, professor claims that hydrogen is not easy toget which needs considerably cold temperature to achieve, so that’ means it’s rare.
Second,professor asserts that hydrogen engine create more pollution problems thaninternal-combustion engine does. During the progress of extracting hydrogenfrom natural gas and water, it would consume plentiful oil which would make thepollution problems worst. In opposition to what passage said that itcontributes to pollution solving, the lecture totally dispute it.
Finally,from the lecture, the professor point out that it's expensive to buy ahydrogen-based engine which is made by one costly material. Conversely, thepassage state that it will save money when we choose to use hydrogen engines whichit’s twice efficient than internal-combustionengine.
Inconclusion, the viewpoints put forwarded in lecture contract with what ispresented in reading passage. What’s more, the professor clearindentifies the weakness in the reading passage.
第一次写综合,感觉写的好诡异~ 艾弗森 求狠批~ 有什么逻辑、语法、构造不妥的 请多多指教哦 好了 我现在去看看你的,嘿嘿~ |