In this passage, the author argues that construction of new electric plants is no longer necessary building on the premise that home onwers would like to conserve energy and that new technology for home insulation requires less electricity. Also the author suppliments this argument saying the currently operating three plants have served them well and hence any further development is unwarranted. However, the line of reasoning presented by the author is riddled with numerous stated and unstated assumptions.
Firstly, the author states that home owners are starting to become enthusiastic about conserving energy. But the unstated assumption here is that this trend is bound to continue and that the number of such people is bound to increase. This is a strong assumption if we count only the facts stated in the argument which merely makes a passing comment and doesn't provide any statistics. Also it is unstated the cost that these home-owners are willing to pay to conserve energy. Because one can be enthusiastic about many things but ardent supporters would be necessary to bring about a change of thought. Anyway, if this argument fails, then one major pillar on which this argument rests would break down.
Secondly, even if we assume that homeowners want to conserve energy, we do not know whether the old plants are more energy efficient or the new plant could be much more energy efficient. For example, the old power plants could be thermal ones using coal or it could be a one hundred year old one which is wasting gallons of water to produce a small quantity of electricity. We do not know the efficiency at which the current plants are operating and the author implicitly assumes that a new plant would be detrimental from an energy stand-point. This may not really be the case and one could decommission the old ones and replace by a brand new nuclear one which is much more energy efficient.
Thirdly, author considers only the home appliances in assessing the demand for electricity. This could turn out to be a faulty one because the locality could contain a major industrial complex which is taking in most of electricity and is unaffected by the technologically improved home equipmennt. Also the author makes a nuanced statement that the demand for electricity may demand slightly while making a big claim on twice effcient home appliances. So the implicit assumption is demand is going to increase elsewhere and that would almost tantamount to the reduction in home appliance efficiency. Consequently, if major demand for electricity is from a different source there would actually be an increase in demand making construction of new plant pertinent.
Fourthly, the author assumes that the only use of new plant is to serve the particular community which is being served by existing three plants. But, as already stated the current ones could be old, or it would make a huge economic impact by constructing a new plant and selling electricity to other communities because maybe this locality is near a feasible site for a hydo-electric plant. So if this assumption breaks down and even if all other assumptions are true, it would still be prudent to construct the plant.
In conclusion, the author's argument against construction of new power plants is rife with holes and depends on validity of multiple uncorrelated assumptions. And if any of them fails, the whole argument falls apart.
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- not OK
--------------------
flaws:
Let's analyze the structure of the statement and argue accordingly:
condition 1:
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.
condition 2:
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.
conclusion:
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.
then here goes the argument:
argument 1:
maybe people use more home appliances than ever before.
argument 2:
maybe home insulation and passive solar heating are too expensive
argument 3:
maybe a lot of people move to this city
------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 567 350
No. of Characters: 2805 1500
No. of Different Words: 254 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.88 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.947 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.734 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 202 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 142 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 106 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 69 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.652 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.833 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.826 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.307 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.563 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.106 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 242, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...e insulation requires less electricity. Also the author suppliments this argument sa...
^^^^
Line 3, column 355, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...hich merely makes a passing comment and doesnt provide any statistics. Also it is unst...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 386, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...ment and doesnt provide any statistics. Also it is unstated the cost that these home...
^^^^
Line 7, column 300, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...chnologically improved home equipmennt. Also the author makes a nuanced statement th...
^^^^
Line 11, column 20, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...struct the plant. In conclusion, the authors argument against construction of new po...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, anyway, but, consequently, first, firstly, hence, however, if, may, really, second, secondly, so, still, then, third, thirdly, thus, well, while, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 36.0 19.6327345309 183% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 11.1786427146 170% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 13.6137724551 140% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 55.5748502994 103% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2865.0 2260.96107784 127% => OK
No of words: 566.0 441.139720559 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06183745583 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.87757670434 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81047429238 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 259.0 204.123752495 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.457597173145 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 895.5 705.55239521 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.0882772017 57.8364921388 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.565217391 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6086956522 23.324526521 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.17391304348 5.70786347227 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.105755378389 0.218282227539 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0412669143871 0.0743258471296 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0489420260215 0.0701772020484 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0592792427201 0.128457276422 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0382995656342 0.0628817314937 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.31 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 98.500998004 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.