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
While it may be true that constructing a new energy plant is not necessary for the needs of the town, this authors argument does not make a cogent case for stopping the construction of the plant based on energy needs. Even though the correlations stated in argument are probable, they are base on many assumptions and thus, not strong enough to lead to the authors conclusion.
Citing surveys of home owners, the author reports that an increased amount of home owners have stated that they are eager to conserve energy. It is not clear, however, the scope and validity of the survey. For example, the survey could have asked the home owners that giving they had a choice of consuming more energy or conserving energy they may have been swayed to answer that they would prefer to conserve. The survey might not have asked whether or not they have actual future plans to do so. Moreover, the sample may not have been representative of the home owners in the city debating over building an energy plant and perhaps only homeowners from cities were energy is especially expensive were asked. Unless the survey is fully representative, valid and reliable, it can not be used to effectively back the authors argument.
Additionally, the author implies that because manufacturers have started to market more energy efficient home appliances, home owners were likely to buy these appliances and thus, consume less energy. While an increase in energy efficient appliances could cut down energy consumption, a concrete connection between the current supply of energy efficient appliances and consumption of energy is not effectively made. Though the supply of these product have increased, it cannot be assumed that the demand for them has also increased. Moreover, we cannot be sure from the information given if these appliances were marketed everyone, or if they are marketed for groups who have a sufficient amount a funds to invest in such products. Without more information about the prices of such products, where are being sold and for whom, we cannot assume that the city home owners will purchase them. To strengthen his argument, the author would benefit from implementing a valid survey asking a wife range of questions regarding the demand for energy sufficient home appliances and at what cost would these home owners invest in such products.
Finally, the author states that since new technologies for better home insulation and passive solar heating have become available, home owners will consume less energy when heating houses. This statement assumes that since technology is available homeowners are likely to use them. The problem is, that even if these technologies help consume energy, it cannot be assumed that homeowners will spend the resources needed in order to introduce these technologies in to their homes. It could be that these technologies are costly and thus most home owners won’t be able to afford them. Moreover, it could be possible that these new technologies cannot be installed in all homes, like apartment buildings or very old houses. Regardless of whether the technology is available or not, the author does not effectively show a connection between these new technologies and actual energy conserving.
A new energy plant may not be a wise addition to the city for it may lead to high pollution and a large amount of resources that can be allocated to other ventures, for these reasons the city may decide that it is not a good idea to build one. However, this author’s argument is not likely to significantly persuade that it is not needed in the city.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
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: 22 15
No. of Words: 598 350
No. of Characters: 2940 1500
No. of Different Words: 242 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.945 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.916 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.615 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 218 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 130 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 98 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 68 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.182 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.114 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.773 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.325 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.543 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.152 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 358, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... thus, not strong enough to lead to the authors conclusion. Citing surveys of home ow...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 444, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...nserve. The survey might not have asked whether or not they have actual future plans to do so....
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 817, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...can not be used to effectively back the authors argument. Additionally, the author im...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 438, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this product' or 'these products'?
Suggestion: this product; these products
... effectively made. Though the supply of these product have increased, it cannot be assumed th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 697, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a fund' or simply 'funds'?
Suggestion: a fund; funds
...for groups who have a sufficient amount a funds to invest in such products. Without mor...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1135, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...se home owners invest in such products. Finally, the author states that since ne...
^^^
Line 5, column 357, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uade that it is not needed in the city.
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, however, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, then, thus, while, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 36.0 19.6327345309 183% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 24.0 12.9520958084 185% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 55.0 28.8173652695 191% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 59.0 55.5748502994 106% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3011.0 2260.96107784 133% => OK
No of words: 597.0 441.139720559 135% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04355108878 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.94303383012 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7103844263 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 257.0 204.123752495 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.430485762144 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 968.4 705.55239521 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 4.96107784431 262% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.5819976284 57.8364921388 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.863636364 119.503703932 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1363636364 23.324526521 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.0 5.70786347227 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => 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: 0.152841543808 0.218282227539 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0567443555032 0.0743258471296 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0699280737201 0.0701772020484 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.080106761556 0.128457276422 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0739246354146 0.0628817314937 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.3550499002 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.31 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 98.500998004 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.