In the given set of information, both the reading passage and the lecture deal with ethanol . The lecturer casts doubt on the reading passage's claim that ethanol is not a good alternative to gasoline, by presenting three counter-arguments. First, the reading passage claims that the release of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere when processing ethanol (표현을 명확히 해주세요.) would cause environmental problems as many as gasoline does like gasoline. However, the lecturer argues that the reading passage's claim is disputable. This is because ethanol is made from of corns, that absorbs (corns는 복수니까.) carbon dioxide when growing up. Thus, the process of making ethanol counteracts the environmental problems unlike gasoline. Next, according to the reading passage, the production of ethanol will reduce the amount of plants available to feed farm animals. However, the lecturer claims that this explanation is controversial. To be specific, cellulose, the cell wall in plants that are not eaten by animals, is used for the production of ethanol. Thus, food source for animals would not disapear disappear as ethanol is produced by parts that are not eaten by animals. Lastly, the lecturer disagrees on the reading passage's claim that the price of ethanol was only competitive to that of gasoline price due to government's governmental support. He claims that governmental support is would be unnecessary in the future, because increase in production and consumption always lead to a lower lowered price of ethanol available. Thus, the price would decrease and not increase in the future. Writing 0-30 scale Fair(24-26) 전반적으로 reading passage와 listening passage의 주장을 잘 정리하고 요약하였습니다. 다만 문법적인 면에서는 아쉽거나 어색한 부분이 많습니다. 몇 가지 어색한 표현을 본문에 수정하였습니다. 그밖에 관사의 사용이 어색하거나 및 주어-동사의 단복수가 어긋나는 경우가 있습니다. |