TPO22
The professor actually contradicts the statements made in the passage. He is of the view that ethanol fuel is a good alternative to gasolinein(小粗心) the United State and offers three specific points.
First, according to the professor, the use of ethanol fuel will not add to the global warming. It is admitted that the use of this ethanol fuel releases carbon dioxide, but the total amount of carbon dioxide made by the ethanol will not increase. Since this fuel is made of plants, such as corns, the growing plants actually absorb carbon dioxide as one source of their nutrition. Consequently, the use of this fuel helps reduce the amount of the green house gas.
Further, contrary to belief (建议前面加个the限定下)in the passage that ethanol dramatically reduces the amount of plants available for other uses, the professor asserts that ethanol does not have to reduce the amount of plants for feeding. To be specific, ethanol can be made by a kind of plant that will not be eaten by animals, thus will not occupy the part of plants used for feeding.
Finally, the professor also points out that the price of ethanol will compete that of the gasoline in the long run. He said that though the low price of this fuel is currently maintained by the support from government, as the consumption of ethanol keeps growing, the price of it will eventually decrease. If the consumption(亮点词汇) of the ethanol grows three times as much as the amount of (去掉of)now, the price of producing the fuel is likely to drop 40%. This makes the final argument in the passage indefensible.(亮点词汇)
In conclusion, the contents in the passage are totally jeopardized by the professor, who uses three contradictory points to weaken the argument.(总结简洁有力)
这篇综合听写不错, 语言功底扎实. Excellent ! 建议把你那个professor多换换吧~特多了点~
PS,我的上传了,地址是: http://forum.chasedream.com/TOEFL_Writing/thread-781814-3-1.html#last
-- by 会员 lizchang1990 (2012/11/15 20:55:35)
不看不知道,professor确实有点多,决定second point里的给换掉。非常谢谢~