ISSUE60 求建议求拍砖求指教，谢谢

zhanjian0229UID: 2940308

60. The following appeared in a letter from a firm providing investment advice for a client.
"Most homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last heating season that region experienced 90 days with below-normal temperatures, and climate forecasters predict that this weather pattern will continue for several more years. Furthermore, many new homes are being built in the region in response to recent population growth. Because of these trends, we predict an increased demand for heating oil and 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 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 this argument, the arguer concludes that demand for heating oil will increase and he recommend investment in Consolidated Industries, one of whose major business operations is the retail sale of home heating oil. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, clearly examining the author's reason, we may find that it is unconvincing. The argument is flawed in several critical respects.
  First, it is assumed without justification that background conditions have remained the same at different times. The author unfairly assumes that inhabitants living in the northeastern United States will use oil as their major fuel for heating in the future. This poor assumption overlooks the possibility that they might change their traditional method. Rapid rise or frequent fluctuation of the price of heating oil might compel inhabitants to search for a cost-effective way. The clean, low-cost electric heating may be a good choice. The young emigrants might bring new way like geothermal heating to this area and alter the tradition method. The arguer's reasoning is definitely flawed unless the arguer can convince me that these and other possible scenarios are unlikely.
  Secondly, the author assumes that 90 days with below-normal temperatures is abnormal in this area. Yet, the author offers no evidence to substantiate this assumption. For the high latitude of this area, there are always 90 plus days of which temperatures below normal. So the demand for heating oil won't increase. Besides, the vague sentences "below-normal temperatures" weaken the cogency. The author should make a rigorous definition for illustrating the very low temperatures. What's more, climate forecasters' prediction might be wrong. The author should consult some meteorologists who study the long-term climate.
Thirdly, the author assumes that the recent population growth will lead to new buildings growth. It is reasonable to doubt that what the author assumes will not happen in reality. For example, there are lots of floating populations who rent house in this area. In the winter, for the severe cold, they might leave this area to some warmer cities in the south. In addition, new buildings might use geothermal heating to save energy. To reach the cited conclusion, the author must explain why none of these alternatives is available.
   The last but not the least important, even if the evidence turns out to support the foregoing assume, the Consolidated Industries would not necessarily be profitable as a result. The Consolidated Industries have the major business operations of retail sale of home heating oil. However, cities in this area might hire big industries which wholesale the heating oil for serving. The increasing price of the primary source of the heating oil might also render it unprofitable despite the increasing demand.
   To sum up, the author's argument is not based on valid evidence or reliable reasoning. In order to draw a better conclusion, the author should cite some evidence which is more persuasive, reason more convincingly and take every possible consideration in to account.