The following appeared in a memorandum from the planning department of an electric power company.
"Several recent surveys indicate that home owners are increasingly eager to conserve energy. At the same time, manufacturers are now marketing many home appliances, such as refrigerators and air conditioners, that are almost twice as energy efficient as those sold a decade ago. Also, new technologies for better home insulation and passive solar heating are readily available to reduce the energy needed for home heating. Therefore, the total demand for electricity in our area will not increase - and may decline slightly. Since our three electric generating plants in operation for the past twenty years have always met our needs, construction of new generating plants will not be necessary.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
In this argument, the arguer concludes that they do not need more construction of new generating plants in operation to supply more electricity. To support this argument, the author points out that manufacturers are now marketing more energy efficient home appliances than those sold a decade ago. In addition, the arguer reasons that the new technologies of solar heating system are readily available reduce the energy needed for home heating. Finally, the author concludes that there is no need for new generating plants because the total demand for electricity will reduce and for the past twenty years their three electric generating plants always can meet their needs. This argument is flawed in three major aspects.
To begin with, the arguer falsely rests on the gratuitous assumption that using more energy efficient home appliances is the cause of the reduction of electricity. However, it cannot establish a general causal relationship between efficient appliances and reduction of electricity. Without ruling out other factors or presenting stronger evidence, the author cannot conclude that the use of energy-saving appliances will certainly lead to a reduction in electricity consumption. It's quite possible that people may use those home appliances more often just because they save more energy than older appliances. Thus, this causal relationship is untenable.
Secondly, the validity of the comparison is doubtful. The author compared new efficient technology with that of ten years ago which is absolutely unreasonable. Because the argument offers no evidence that would rule out interpretations such as this, the results are insufficient to support the author's conclusion.
Finally, we may give allowance to the belief that generally speaking passive solar heating system is available to reduce the energy needed for home heating. But this does not sufficiently assure that the same tendency applies to this area. What if the region does not have sunny weather all year round? Therefore, the author should provide more information about this situation.
In conclusion, the recommendation that there is no need for new electric generating plants is ill-founded. To strengthen this recommendation the author would have to demonstrate that whether to use energy-saving appliances will absolutely lead to less electricity, and provide more specific evidence about geographic information. All that has been shown so far is a correlation between these events
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-02-10 | Yam Kumar Oli | 59 | view |
| 2022-12-08 | abhikhanna | 69 | view |
| 2022-12-08 | myfavpear | 62 | view |
| 2022-12-08 | myfavpear | 78 | view |
| 2022-12-07 | abhikhanna | 75 | view |
- Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position. Every 66
- Governments should place few if any restrictions on scientific research and development Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take In develop 83
- The following appeared in the health section of a magazine on trends and lifestyles People who use the artificial sweetener aspartame are better off consuming sugar since aspartame can actually contribute to weight gain rather than weight loss For example
- A recently issued twenty year study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia investigated the possible therapeutic effect of consuming salicylates Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin a medicine used to treat headaches Al 53
- 1 16
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 10 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 378 350
No. of Characters: 2059 1500
No. of Different Words: 187 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.409 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.447 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.903 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 160 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 116 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 88 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 67 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.9 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.136 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.303 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.532 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.069 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 295, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...results are insufficient to support the authors conclusion. Finally, we may give all...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, in addition, in conclusion, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 55.5748502994 70% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2106.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 378.0 441.139720559 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.57142857143 5.12650576532 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40933352052 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99301651653 2.78398813304 108% => OK
Unique words: 192.0 204.123752495 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.507936507937 0.468620217663 108% => OK
syllable_count: 666.0 705.55239521 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.22255489022 166% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 54.7178215941 57.8364921388 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.3 119.503703932 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.9 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.35 5.70786347227 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.112593774695 0.218282227539 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0355895285857 0.0743258471296 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.044673167081 0.0701772020484 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0605515531557 0.128457276422 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0399086213382 0.0628817314937 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.28 48.3550499002 75% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.5979740519 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 98.500998004 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 12.3882235529 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.