The reading and the listening are about using ethanol instead of gasoline. While the author calims that ethanol is not a good replacement for gasoline, the professor refutes all the claims made my the listening and states that ethanol can be a good alternative to gasoline.
First, the speaker contends that ethanol could not solve the problem of global warming. On the contrary, the lecturer opposes this and mentions that ethanol could not add to global warming. The professor explaines that ethanol is made from plants, such as corns; so people should grow plant in order to produce ethanol. The lecturer points out that growing plants could absord carbon dioxide from the air and reduce global warming.
Second, the reading states that using ethanol could reduce the amount of plants available as animals' nutrients. On the other hand, the listening contradicts this and says that cellulose is the main part of the plant that should be used to produce ethanol. The professor mentions that cellulose finds only on the cell wall, which is in the part of plants that do not be eaten by animals. As a result, the lecturer adds that using plants to produce ethanol will not diminsh the amount of food for animals.
Third, the writer claims that ethanol could not compete with gasoline in the term of price. Conversely, the lecturer refutes this and posits that ethanol could compete with gasoline in the future. The professor exaplains that if people start to buy ethanol, its production will increase, which could drop its price. The speaker mentions that there is a statistic done found that if the production of ethanol is three time greater than today, the cost of ethanol production will drop by forty percent.
The reading and the listening are about using
ethanol
instead
of
gasoline
. While the author
calims
that
ethanol
is not a
good
replacement for
gasoline
, the
professor
refutes all the claims made my the listening and states that
ethanol
can be a
good
alternative to gasoline.
First
, the speaker contends that
ethanol
could not solve the problem of global warming.
On the contrary
, the
lecturer
opposes this and mentions that
ethanol
could not
add
to global warming. The
professor
explaines
that
ethanol
is made
from
plants
, such as corns;
so
people
should grow
plant
in order to produce
ethanol
. The
lecturer
points out that growing
plants
could
absord
carbon dioxide from the air and
reduce
global warming.
Second, the reading states that using
ethanol
could
reduce
the amount of
plants
available as animals' nutrients.
On the other hand
, the listening contradicts this and says that cellulose is the main part of the
plant
that should be
used
to produce
ethanol
. The
professor
mentions that cellulose finds
only
on the cell wall, which is in the part of
plants
that do not
be eaten
by animals.
As a result
, the
lecturer
adds
that using
plants
to produce
ethanol
will not
diminsh
the amount of food for animals.
Third, the writer claims that
ethanol
could not compete with
gasoline
in the term of price.
Conversely
, the
lecturer
refutes this and posits that
ethanol
could compete with
gasoline
in the future. The
professor
exaplains
that if
people
start
to
buy
ethanol
, its production will increase, which could drop its price. The speaker mentions that there is a statistic done found that if the production of
ethanol
is three time greater than
today
, the cost of
ethanol
production will drop by forty percent.