寄托家园留学论坛

标题: 求助一道逻辑结论题 [打印本页]

作者: wesleyz    时间: 2020-11-16 22:24:29     标题: 求助一道逻辑结论题

Almost all forms of large-scale electric power generation pollute the environment; the less electric power consumed, therefore, the less pollution created. Ordinary refrigerators account for 15 percent to 25 percent of the average United States household's annual electric power consumption, but energy efficient refrigerators use 20 percent to 30 percent less electricity than ordinary refrigerators.

3. If the information above is correct, which of the following conclusions does it best support?

A. The increasingly widespread use of energy efficient refrigerators will ensure that less pollution will be produced twenty years from now than is currently being produced.

D. The replacement of ordinary refrigerators with energy-efficient refrigerators can help reduce the amount of new pollution created.

我的问题是:
1. 为何A选项可以自然地假定人口,或说冰箱的量,不会产生大量变化?
例如:
当下有10台普通冰箱,每台产生10单位污染,一共产生100单位污染;
若未来10台都被换成每台只产生7单位污染的环保冰箱,那么一共产生70单位污染,必然比现在低,毫无疑问。
但为何可以假定,未来的冰箱最多只会有14台?因为如果有15台,就算都是环保冰箱,那么也会产生105单位的污染。

2.
我认为D里的new pollution指的是从现在开始所有冰箱产生的污染。
换句话说,D也在作比较,比较的是
I:从现在起不replace普通冰箱,所产生的new pollution
II:replace后产生的new pollution
或说是从现在这个时间点,开始分叉的两个平行线,唯一不同的变量是冰箱类型的占比,其中一个毫无疑问环保冰箱更多。
若是如此D非常明确是正确的。
但是,一些书籍里似乎(并没有明确解释)把D里的new pollution解释为除文中提及的pollution之外的“其他类型”的污染。
这是何以得出的?
当我说I wrote some fictions. I want to write some new ones.为何这个new就会变成指代除fiction之外的literature类型,而不是指新的fictions?




欢迎光临 寄托家园留学论坛 (https://bbs.gter.net/) Powered by Discuz! X2