“Homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last year that region experienced twenty days with below-average temperatures, and local weather forecasters throughout the region predict that this weather pattern will continue for several more years. Furthermore, many new homes have been built in this region during the past year. Based on these developments, we predict a large increase in the demand for heating oil. Therefore, we recommend investment in Consolidated Industries, one of whose major business operations is the retail sale of home heating oil.”
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
Winters are significantly harsh in northeastern area in united states. Also, people used fuel as traditional oil in order to cope with the cold. At last session of heating, the area experienced 90 days below-nominal temperature and based on that forecaster claimed that this pattern would continue in upcoming year. Also, due to the population more home has been build. Hence, it is profitable to invest in consolidate industries, that will sell the home heating oil. Stated in this way argument fails to mention several points based on which it could be evaluated. As a result, conclusion relies on an assumption that has a no strong evidence. Hence, the author's conclusion is unsubstantiated and unsupported.
First and foremost, the argument readily assumes that last season winter was about 90 days with below the minimum temperature. Therefore, same long winter happened at this season as well. This is merely argument without solid background. Based on only one season of procrastinating of winter would not ensure same situation would be happened in next time or continue in the future. It might be possible in that year weather pattern would be changed and due to that winter was long lasting. Again, argument does not specify particular years that same situation continue. It may be possible winter was long as for 2 years. Therefore, investing huge money in industry for selling heating oil would be worthless.
Second, the argument claims that, more house are developing in area; so, more heating oil require in order to provide heat in house. This is again very weak and unsupported argument. For example, all new home uses the electric heater then there will no use of oil. So, based on house frequency it would be difficult to predict profit from heating oil. Also, many people use solar energy in order to getting heat. Therefore, author argument is not compelling as required. Here, author should consider the other factors of technology rather than considering primary source of oil.
Finally, the argument directly presumes that everyone should buy heating oil from this new industry. However, it might be possible all citizen of that area become inveterate for buying oil at single place. It may be possible government provides subsidies for that oil. Therefore, they more biased towards specific industry. Also, we don't know how many industries already their in same area that selling same oil. Hence, without sufficient data of other industries we can't predict profit from heating oil industry.
In conclusion, the author's argument unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it, the author must provide more concrete evidence. It could be considerably strengthened if author mentions all critical and relevant facts. But, without proper clearity the conclusion is unplausible. Hence, the author's conclusion has a no legs to stand.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 34 15
No. of Words: 461 350
No. of Characters: 2325 1500
No. of Different Words: 230 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.634 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.043 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.687 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 174 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 132 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 91 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 13.559 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.007 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.706 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.253 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.435 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.06 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 657, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...at has a no strong evidence. Hence, the authors conclusion is unsubstantiated and unsup...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 62, Rule ID: BUY_VBG[1]
Message: Did you mean 'by'?
Suggestion: by
... directly presumes that everyone should buy heating oil from this new industry. How...
^^^
Line 13, column 334, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...sed towards specific industry. Also, we dont know how many industries already their ...
^^^^
Line 13, column 468, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
... sufficient data of other industries we cant predict profit from heating oil industr...
^^^^
Line 13, column 515, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...edict profit from heating oil industry. In conclusion, the authors argument unpe...
^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 20, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...oil industry. In conclusion, the authors argument unpersuasive as it stands. To ...
^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 288, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...e conclusion is unplausible. Hence, the authors conclusion has a no legs to stand.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, hence, however, if, may, second, so, then, therefore, well, as for, for example, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.6327345309 112% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2407.0 2260.96107784 106% => OK
No of words: 460.0 441.139720559 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23260869565 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6311565067 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74813134656 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 204.123752495 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.513043478261 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 747.9 705.55239521 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 4.96107784431 222% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 34.0 19.7664670659 172% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 22.8473053892 57% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.8892557943 57.8364921388 50% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 70.7941176471 119.503703932 59% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 13.5294117647 23.324526521 58% => More words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 3.94117647059 5.70786347227 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 17.0 6.88822355289 247% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.164553880764 0.218282227539 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0410486591105 0.0743258471296 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0537158975872 0.0701772020484 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0912310333861 0.128457276422 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0660905857904 0.0628817314937 105% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.0 14.3799401198 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.28 48.3550499002 121% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 12.197005988 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.46 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.99 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 98.500998004 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.2 11.1389221557 65% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.