Argument71 【CSMY作文互改第三小组】第七次作业，限时完成，有拍比回

lonixUID: 2202232

【题目】Argument7171. 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. 铜在自然中与其他矿物和有价值的金属混合存在于矿石中，而且矿石中铜的比例可能有很大差别。直到最近，从矿石中提取纯铜的唯一方法是通过一种需要大量电力的流程，特别是当矿石中铜的比例比较低的时候。新的铜提取技术在处理同等数量的原矿石时能够比老的方式节省40％的电力，特别是当矿石中铜的比例比较高的时候。因此，我们可以预期铜矿提取工业所用的电力将会显著减少。

提纲：
论断：炼铜行业用电会显著下降，因为新技术比旧方法省电40%，尤其是矿物含铜量比较高时。
(1). 该技术是否被广泛应用不得而知，如果该技术推广有困难，没有厂家愿意使用，那么该行业用电则不会下降。
(2). 很难断定新技术比老技术确实用电减少，因为文中只提及矿物中同的品位高的时候，新技术能节省40%的电，这并不代表同样适用于品位低的矿。
(3). 没有提及是否会扩大生产或者产量加大，如果是这样的话，即使新技术真的能减少用电，而且每个工厂都使用新技术，也并不能保证用电量的减少
结论：未仔细了解新技术的应用情况，对于该生产行业不太熟悉，盲目乐观估计。

WORDS: 381(436 modified)       TIME: 上午 12:30:00          DATE: 2007-1-23

At first glance, the author's argument seems sound. According to his conclusion, the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry will decline because of the introduction of new technology which tends to save almost 40% more electricity than the older method when the proportion of copper in the ore is high. But unfortunately, if careful consideration is made on this argument, we will realize that how groundless and unpersuasive it is.

To begin with, the arguer unjustifiably assumes that the new technology is being widely applied in copper-extraction industry. However, the arguer fails to provide evidence to substantiate this assumption. Absence evidence to verify this assumption, it is entirely possible that there is many difficulties to advocate this method in the present day to most of copper-extraction industry. Without much information about the situation of its application, the arguer would hardly persuade me that the quantity of electricity used to produce copper will be reduced.

Secondly, only by the information the arguer offers, it is still hard for us to know the efficiency of the new technology. The electricity used in copper production has close relationship with the proposition of the copper in the raw ore, but the arguer only makes a comparison between old method and new technology in those who have a high copper proposition. This will result in high possibility that the new technology may require more electricity to produce the same copper than the old one. If this is the case, that applying new technology in copper-extraction inevitably reduces electricity would undoubtedly lead to abortive.

Even assuming that the new technology can actually reduce electricity and is being widely used in copper-extraction industry, but the arguer fails to take into account the demand of the copper in the constitution of the modern society. If this demand is ample and extracting copper is beneficial that people in increasing number invest their money on this industry, that either increasing copper-extraction industries or producing more copper would inevitably use more electricity. Without considering such situations, it would be difficult for me to believe the arguer's conclusion.

In sum, the argument is not well reasoned as it stands. The evidence provided in the argument does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide more information about the situation of the application of the new method, the efficiency of the new method to deal with ore with a low proposition of copper, and even whether there is an urgent demand for the copper. Also other alternative factors influenced the conclusion should be taken into account.