argument82 可以从哪几个方面攻击啊？帮忙指点一下，谢谢

delta496UID: 193816

82.The following appeared in a letter to an editor.
'In many countries, wood is the primary fuel used for heating and cooking, but wood smoke can cause respiratory and eye problems, and extensive use of wood causes deforestation, a major environmental problem. In contrast, charcoal, made by partially burning wood in a controlled process, is a fuel that creates less smoke than wood does. Moreover, although charcoal costs slightly more than wood, less charcoal is needed to produce the same amount of heat. Therefore, people who use wood as their primary fuel can, without experiencing economic hardship, switch to charcoal and can thereby improve their health and preserve the environment.'

delta496UID: 193816

是高频题之一啊，我怎么想来想去就找到两个错误
1.对健康不一定有利 即 烟少 不等于 危害少
2.不一定能保护环境 即 有可能消耗更多木材

还有其它的吗？？

我看到有人攻击“without experiencing economic hardship”？？

乒乓球爱上九月UID: 162925

首先从wood的角度来说,它的两个理由就都有漏洞: 健康问题是由用wood造成的说法值得怀疑,deforestation是不是只是因为用wood造成的?
然后再从哪个新的下手,题目没有给出明确的成本计算啊,这就有小尾巴了

delta496UID: 193816

'In many countries, wood is the primary fuel used for heating and cooking, but wood smoke can cause respiratory and eye problems, and extensive use of wood causes deforestation, a major environmental problem.
我把这句当作作者的假设了，即论述的背景，就是没想到去攻击这句

谢谢，谢谢，终于可以去睡觉了