The reading and listening materials have a conflict of opinions about ethanol fuel. The writer believes that it is not a good alternative to gasoline, which is contradicted by the following lecture.
Firstly, the writer claims that ethanol fuel fails to solve the environment pollution since it also release carbon dioxidewhen burned.分论据必须给出 However, the speaker opposes the claim by saying that ethanol fuel is made of plants like corn, which absorbs carbon dioxide from the air as part of its nutrition. So the process of growing the plant counteracts the release of green house gas emission.
Secondly, the writer states that the production of ethanol fuel would lead to a decline in source of food for farm animal, while the lecture views this issue from an opposite angle. According to him, ethanol fuel is made of cellulose, which is not eaten by animals. As a result, the amount of animal food won’t be reduced at all.
Third, the passage argues that ethanol fuel is less competitive than gasoline in terms of price because it is still relying on government’s subsidies. By contrast, in accordance with the speaker, the reading’s claim does not hold water. It will no longer be necessary for government to subsidize ethanol fuel because an increase in demand will result in an increase in production, which gives rise to a drop in its price. According to a study, if the production of ethanol fuel is three times greater than it is now, the price will drop by 40%.
In the reading passage, the author raises that reading less literature has caused unfortunate effects on the reading public, the cultural general and literature itself. On the contrary, the professor strongly contradicts with it.
To begin with, according to the reading passage, the author mainly talks about reading less literature cannot provide readers with intellectual stimulation. By contrast, the lecturer disagrees with it and she reasons that a book doesn’t have to be literature to be intellectually stimulating. Science books, history and political analysis aren’t literature but they are often of high quality and some of those books are just as creative and well-written as novels and poems. So don’t assume that someone who isn’t reading literature isn’t reading a good book.
To be followed, the reading passage indicates that the culture is in decline. However, the speaker holds the opposite opinion and she says that people are not just spending less time in literature and they are spending less time with books in general. However, today, there are many culturally valuable material that isn’t written such as a brilliant song and good movie. People are not wasting their time when they listen to good songs and watch good movies. Those non-literal activities will not lower the culture. Even some of those creative forms can speak more directly to contemporary concerns than literature does.
Lastly, the writer in the reading part says that it is the readers’ fault to lead to the less support for literature. By comparison, the listening material presents a totally different opinion that it is the authors’ fault because today’s literature is intended to be difficult to understand. So don’t assume the earlier’s generations of readers would read a lot modern literature today.