argu 43 真心实意求帮助~

ivygongUID：3023235

17号就考了，没写上几篇，很没底，麻烦大家给改改~~~真的是不胜感激~
题目：

The following appeared in a memorandum written by the chairperson of the West Egg Town Council.

"Two years ago, consultants predicted that West Egg's landfill, which is used for garbage disposal, would be completely filled within five years. During the past two years, however, the town's residents have been recycling twice as much material as they did in previous years. Next month the amount of recycled material—which includes paper, plastic, and metal—should further increase, since charges for pickup of other household garbage will double. Furthermore, over 90 percent of the respondents to a recent survey said that they would do more recycling in the future. Because of our town's strong commitment to recycling, the available space in our landfill should last for considerably longer than predicted."

Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.


习作
With the increasingly stronger support of the residents in town by using recycled
material,it might be a possibility that the West Egg's landfill will last longer than
predicted. However,it is still some lack of evidence that stop me from being convinced
totally by the author.
    In order to illustrate the efforts citizens made these two years, the chairperson
announced that they have been recycling twice as much as they did before, and 90 percent
of them showed a great determination about further contribution. When our attentions are
turned to the happiness these numbers gave us,we might lose the sight of the fact that
there is not a shred of evidence showed how much material the inhabitant recycled in
previous years and will they accomplish what they promised."Twice"is just a relative
proportion,we cannot deny that there is a chance the residents did few recycle jobs before,
and made the landfill harder to bear day and day so that the consultants gave the prediction.
On this level,three or four times makes no difference to change the situation,not to mention
"twice."
    To deal with the garbage problem, government charge more for the other household pickup
than it used to and being confident in leading to more recycle and less others, which I
deeply doubt.Product like vegetables and battery cannot be made by recycle material or use
for it. Make the payment much higher would not change the fact,which means the garbage might
not reduce. What's more, there still no specific number about how much the government charge
yesterday and right now even how much it will be.Without the evidence, we cannot draw the
conclusion that the resident will care about the charge and follow the rules to make less not
recycling rubbish.
    City garbage is consisted of not only families',but also architectures' and industrial
refuse. Providing that the residents will spare their efforts to help West Egg Town get rid of
the garbage trouble,but what about the factories and new building projects? According
to the survey works in most districts, industrial refuse takes 70-80 percentage of the
city garbage,which means though residents obey the restrictions, it will change little no
matter how. To make sure whether the landfill will last longer or not,we must know
the industrial situation. Otherwise,the statement author gave is discreditable.
    Less pollution,less garbage are what we do want,however,specific evidence and representative
numbers are also what we do need. Without answering the question of industrial refuse and the
detail residents acted,we simple cannot make the leap to longer use of the landfill.
字数422   

谢谢大家谢谢！:handshake

ivygongUID：3023235

没人帮个忙么~~~