【综合写作】catfield作业贴”

catfieldUID: 2481699

TPO9
The professor makes three points to claim that hydrogen is not the solution to problems caused by the internal-combustion engine, which totally disagrees with the point stated in the reading passage that hydrogen-based engines, with many advangtages, are much better than internal-combustion engines.

The first point that the professor uses to challenge the reading is that hydrogen cannot be avaliable as people wish, according to her, hydrogen can only be obtained in a highly-pured substance, which requires advanced technology of freezing storage. However, the reading states that hydrogen can be gotten from various sources.

Moreover, despite the statement in the reading that the use of hydrogen produce no pollutents and it is environmental to our life, the professor contends that hydrogen actually creat products which are harmful to environment. Then she supports this point with the fact that the factories which produce hydrogen burn coal and oil, as a result, carbon dioxide are discharged. In other words, the production of hydrogen indirectly produce noxious substances to the environment.

Finally, the professor states that people will not save money when they start to use hydrogen as energy to drive cars. For those hydrogen based engines, they use a magterial--platium as the coat of engine, which is very expensive. Thus it will spend people a lot of money on this material. However, this directly contradicts what the reading passage indicates because the reading insists that the hydrogen-based engines are much more economical than internal-combustion engine.