Thereading passage is about the issue of alternative source of energy of cars. Theprofessor’s lecture deals with the same issue. However, she thinks thatinternal-combustion engine could not be instead（instead是什么词性？副词吧，这里用的不对吧，还是用be replaced by） by the hydrogen-basedfuel-cell engine, which contradicts what reading states. （童鞋，学gmat了吗？which最好不要修饰前面整句话，reading前面加一个the） And inthe lecture, she uses three specific points to support her view.（这句话我也用过哦，嘿嘿，一本书上的吧）
Firstly, even though the readingpassage suggests that the hydrogen needed for fuel-cell engine cannot easily bedepleted and hydrogen can be derived from various plentiful sources, includingnatural gas and even water,（前面这段再精简一些吧） theprofessor argues in the lecture that various sources cannot be easily used.Because the various sources cannot be used without purification process. Thepurification process is very difficult, and it also needs very high technologyand much more money. 再详细一些吧，是听力没听到吗？有点空泛）Obviously,the professor‘s argument disproves her counterpart inthe reading.
Moreover, despite the statement in the reading thathydrogen-based fuel cells would not cause the pollution problems, the professorcontends that it also would cause a lot of carbon dioxide which is the reasonof pollution problems. Then she supports her view with the fact that the coalor oil must be used in the purification process. And it（这里用一个非限制性定语从句修饰poress会更好） may cause much morecarbon dioxide that internal-combustion engine. （没有谓语啊）In otherwords, hydrogen-based fuel cells could not solve the pollution problems.
Finally, the professor asserts that hydrogen-based fuelcells would cost a lot of money whereas the author of the reading claims thathydrogen-based fuel cells can save money. The professor proves that this claimis indefensible by pointing out that the components of hydrogen-based fuelcells are very expensive.最后一段，可以写的在具体一些，而不要只写一个save money 。