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 applianc

Essay topics:

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 a memorandum, the planning department of an electric power company stated that not only the total need for electricity in our area would not enhance, but also, it may decrease slightly. Thus the construction of new generating plants will not be necessary due to the fact that our three electric generating plants in operation for the past twenty years have always met our demands. The planning department has come to this conclusion based on the consequence of the several recent surveys about the eagerness of people in conserving energy as well as better energy efficiency new home appliances, and also supplying home heat using new insulation methods and passive solar heating. While the correlations stated are logical and probable, three questions must be answered before this recommendation can be appropriately evaluated.

First of all, are the number of electric home appliances using the same over time? In other words, the factors that are used to measure the total electricity demand may change over time. For example, the population is growing, and accordingly, the number of people who are using electrical devices is swiftly increasing, and it may result in more energy usage every day. Moreover, due to the invention of new assistant electrical devices, people who are eager to have a more comfortable life, be interested in using beneficial electrical appliances more than before; therefore, the amount of energy will decrease. If either of these scenarios has merit, then the conclusion drawn in the original argument is significantly weakened.

Secondly, can people be sure that passive solar heating is available all days of the year? The company prematurely assumed that using new technologies for better home insulation as well as passive solar heating can decrease the energy needed for home heating. However, this might not be the case. Perhaps changes in the climate cause a frigid winter in which not only the passive solar heating is not sufficient to provide any heat, but also the need for electricity intensifies even more than at the same time in the previous years. Also, there is still a possibility of cold weather on a rainy day in autumn which the passive solar heating can not be used. If the above is true, then the argument does not hold water!

Furthermore, is the lifetime of electric generating plants forever? The author's assumption about the no need for new plants is because of the three old electric generating plants working for the last twenty years. What if these plants or some of them destroy in a chilly or scorching season in which the requirements of electricity is more than other times. It is undoubtedly true that every electrical device has a lifetime and cannot work forever. Considering the fact that building generating plants takes more attention than other electrical devices, the phenomenon of generating plants' breaking down has a possibility that cannot be denied. Therefore, based on the question mentioned earlier, concluding this assumption seems fragile.

To wrap it up, the argument, as it stands now, is considered flawed due to its reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to answer the tree question above and offer more evidence (perhaps in the form of a systematic research study), then it will be possible to fully evaluate the viability of the memorandum, not to construct new generating plants.

Votes
Average: 7.3 (2 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 190, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ce, but also, it may decrease slightly. Thus the construction of new generating plan...
^^^^
Line 7, column 73, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...electric generating plants forever? The authors assumption about the no need for new pl...
^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, thus, well, while, for example, as well as, first of all, in other words

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.9520958084 139% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2866.0 2260.96107784 127% => OK
No of words: 556.0 441.139720559 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15467625899 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85588840946 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80849340672 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 260.0 204.123752495 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.467625899281 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 924.3 705.55239521 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.9269056489 57.8364921388 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.272727273 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2727272727 23.324526521 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.63636363636 5.70786347227 151% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186080512676 0.218282227539 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0551793114288 0.0743258471296 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0690570710517 0.0701772020484 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.102201095577 0.128457276422 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0642659411197 0.0628817314937 102% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.3799401198 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.3550499002 78% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.197005988 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 98.500998004 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => 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.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 10 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 556 350
No. of Characters: 2787 1500
No. of Different Words: 252 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.856 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.013 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.742 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 201 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 152 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 109 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 76 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.174 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.861 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.826 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.277 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.497 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.064 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5