Augument71 【越洋农场站队】morallrey同主题写作第二期

morallreyUID: 2191298

Argument71 : Copper occurs in nature mixed with other minerals and valuable metals in ore, and the proportion of copper in the ore can vary considerably. Until fairly recently, the only way to extract pure copper from ore was by using a process that requires large amounts of electric energy, especially if the proportion of copper in the ore is low. New copper-extracting technologies can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the older method to process the same amount of raw ore, especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high. Therefore, we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly.

Word:435 time:40
提纲：
1. 两种方法处理的矿石铜的比例未告知，生产等量的铜可能新方法消耗的电能更多。
2．新方法处理低含量铜的消耗的电能情况未知，有可能比不过老方法，而同时当地的矿石恰恰矿石含铜量低。
3．新技术可能会促进练铜工业的发展，使得人们大两采矿练铜，从而导致用电量增加。

   In the argument above ,the author anticipate that the electricity used by the copper-extraction industry would decline significantly with a comparison between the old copper-extracting process , which requires  masses of electricity energy especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is low ,and the new one ,which use up to 40 percent electricity less than older method .This reason process seems cogent ,but under chary analysis, there remain some fallacies in the argument which I illustrate below in details.

     First of all , the arguer fail to  mention the proportion of copper contained in the ore processed by two methods ,which may vary largely and thus lead to meaninglessness in the comparison . To be more specific, if the ore processed by the old extracting method contains fairly  high proportion of copper while the ore processed by new method contains rather low proportion , then the gloss amount of copper produced in old method may be superior to that of new one . Therefore , with out expressly illustration of copper-proportion in the ore  processed in two methods , we can't draw a conclusion that the new method is more power-efficient that the old one.

    Furthermore, it was not mentioned in the argument whether the new method will be electricity-efficient when it process the ore containing low-proportion copper . Maybe  it would cost more electric energy in this situation , In this case , if the ore in that place just contains low-proportion copper . The new method would be not applicable and hence would cost more electricity than the old one .

     Finally , if the advanced  technology can massively reduce the consumption of electricity , the adoptive condition of this technology  is unknown in the future . It's fairly probable that with the advancement of technology , the area of copper-extract would boom , hence large amounts of ore would be excavated and thus more electricity would be consumed , so the gross electricity used by the copper-extracting industry would no decline , but  increase on the contrary .

     Overall , on the one hand , the new techenology may be inferior to the old one for the argument above didn't mention the proportion processed by the two methods which leads the possibility that the new process will cost more electricity to produce equal copper than the old one, on the other hand , the new technology may boost the copper-extracting industry and hence cause it to produce large amount of copper , the electricity consumption will seem to rise . Therefore , the argument is not well-reasoned and unconvincing .