Thereading passage and the lecture hold opposite opinions toward the topic whetherthe ethanol is a good replacement for gasoline. The speaker illustrates thatethanol is a better alternative for three reasons.
First of all, the professor contradicts the argument in the article thatethanol can’t solve the biggest environmental problems: global warming(用定语从句会不会好些呢?之前看过的冒号后一般接句子~拙见). He illustrates that ethanol is often made of plants like(最好用such as,考过G的同学懂得~)corns.Growing plants can absorb the carbon dioxide in air as their nutrition. Actually,the corns(plants更好?) can remove CO2 from the atmosphere. So, the reason provided in thereading is not convincing.
Regarding the second statement in the passage, more than 60 percentages ofcorns have to be used for 10 percentages of fuel needs and animals haven’tenough food, the lecturer points out the inaccuracy of the reason. He explainsthat ethanol is produced by the cellutrice(介个我当时也没听懂是啥植物), which is a kind of cell walls andis an inedible part of trees. Therefore, by using this part(再修饰一下part?) to produce ethanolhas nothing with the available food for animals and cannot endanger their life.(nothing to do with, 最后一句觉得最好修改一下表达的可能更准确些~)
Finally, the speaker demonstrates the explanation that ethanol fuel will neverbe able to compete with gasoline on price as nonsense by stating that taxsubsidies from a government are necessary. (意思好像和lecture里的不同?)In fact, if the productions ofethanol increase, the marginal cost will drop, then the price of ethanol willdecline. Meanwhile(这个衔接的好~), the professor says that if the yields are 3 times(觉得欠妥?直接three times?) greaterthan they are now, the cost of ethanol will drop 40 percentages.
除了third point第一句有点问题,看下来表达什么的还是不错~比较喜欢。差点改迟了?多多包涵 |