With the given evidence the argument seems cogent. However, there are several holes and unwarranted assumptions to undermine the argument. Therefore, the department must answer to the question to make the argument flawless. Although the department might be correct in his evidence. He is too quick to make the changes; his research seems to be incomplete to claim the conclusion. Thus, proper analysis must be done regarding the new appliance, total families, and interested families to adopt the change.
It is not necessary that every product that is available in the market can be affordable by all the people. The price of the available product is not specified as it is the main reason to be encountered. If the price of the new appliance is higher than the old similar product, then customers hesitates to go for the new one. If any of these points hold merit; then the conclusion of the argument strongly weakens.
The analysis period is too long and 10 years is too long to be compared. It vacillates the decision to analyse taking the evidence and facts of 10 years period. There has been huge changes in recent days compared to 10 years ago. Every year some new products are released in the market that is better than past years. Thus, if the comparison is to be done, then it should be done with the past years product. As there might not be 10 years old product in every house of the city. If this point is true, then the conclusion further deteriorates.
If such things happen, then there are several options to sell the electricity to the foreign market. In addition, the over produced electricity can be transferred to the places where there is shortage. It is not stated that the current electricity demand is fulfilling the needs of all the customers in the city. Thus, exhaustive research must be performed before claiming the conclusion. Many research should be performed to see indeed such changes to replace the old appliance with the new one changes the electricity consumption, and if not, what should be done to raise the electricity consumption. As the electronic industry is developing rapidly, there might be high demand of electricity in the industries and other factories which can compensate if loss happens.
The electric planning department fails to analyse other new appliances that might consume high electricity than these two products. Thus, the conclusion seems to be vacillating from its point. Overall, the conclusion might be true in some aspects. The department must provide certain proof to make the conclusion reasonable, logical, and, convincing.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 7 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 433 350
No. of Characters: 2105 1500
No. of Different Words: 187 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.562 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.861 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.68 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 144 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 117 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 87 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.037 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.725 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.481 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.271 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.271 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.089 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 225, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Although” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...question to make the argument flawless. Although the department might be correct in his ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 395, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'years'' or 'year's'?
Suggestion: years'; year's
...e, then it should be done with the past years product. As there might not be 10 years...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 410, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ld be done with the past years product. As there might not be 10 years old product...
^^
Line 4, column 390, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun research seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much research', 'a good deal of research'.
Suggestion: Much research; A good deal of research
...rformed before claiming the conclusion. Many research should be performed to see indeed such ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, regarding, so, then, therefore, thus, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 35.0 19.6327345309 178% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2162.0 2260.96107784 96% => OK
No of words: 433.0 441.139720559 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99307159353 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56165014514 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77764107899 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.459584295612 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 671.4 705.55239521 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.6399865677 57.8364921388 60% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 80.0740740741 119.503703932 67% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.037037037 23.324526521 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.2962962963 5.70786347227 40% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.67664670659 235% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0682835826288 0.218282227539 31% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0214335993725 0.0743258471296 29% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0264682075795 0.0701772020484 38% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0425718399165 0.128457276422 33% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0286164554363 0.0628817314937 46% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.1 14.3799401198 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.3550499002 114% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.0 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 98.500998004 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 12.3882235529 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.