The lecture completely retorts the points of views in the reading material.
As the professor illustrated in the lecture, ethanol has the superiority over gasoline.
On the contrary, the reading material contends an opposite stand
that ethanol cannot replace the gasoline.
The first reason that the professor uses to cast doubt on the
reading material is the using of ethanol will not cause the excess emission
of carbon dioxide which will lead to the global warming. According to him,
the producing of ethanol needs plants, and the plants will in turn absorb the
carbon dioxide for its nurturing. This procedure, in fact, will counteract the
emission and the pollution of using ethanol, which differs from the reading states
that the using of ethanol has no advantage over gasoline.
Another point that the lecture uses to counteract the reading concerns
that the planting of corn will not reduce the food for animals.
The professor claims that the people can produce corns by using cellule
which will not be eaten by the animals. However, the reading material states
that the using of ethanol will reduce the amount of plants to feed animals.
The professor also presents the concept that the price of ethanol will
decrease in the future which is able to compete with gasoline.
It is true that using and producing of ethanol requires subsidy from
government today. Yet with the production of ethanol increases, the
price will decrease, making ethanol more available in the future.
In conclusion, the points in the lecture contrast with what is
presented in the reading material.