argument71 <米国有米寒假作业 >

blackswitchUID: 2110679

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.


In this argument, the arguer concludes that the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry would decline significantly based on the assumption that the new copper-extracting technologies consume less electricity than older one. However, as it stands, However, as it stands, the argument is not hardly convincing due to following critical fallacies.

On the first place, the mere fact that new copper-extracting technologies can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the older method to process the same amount of raw ore does not ensure that the new way can save electricity to extract the same of amount of copper, because it is entirely possible that the new way extract littler copper than the old way from the same raw ore. For example, the old way can extract 20 ton copper from 100 ton raw ore,but the new way only can extract 10 ton copper from the same raw ore. In that case, to get the same quantity of copper, the new way would consume more electricity.

On the second place, even if we accept that the two ways have the same of ability of extracting copper from raw ore, the arguer fails to comprehensively compare the two ways in consumption of electricity. Whether the new way always saves electricity in any case? When the proportion of copper in ore is high, the new way can use less electricity than old way. What about the proportion of copper in ore is low? In addition, whether do other factors- such as the rigidity of the ore --influence the consumption of electricity used in new way or not? In short, without comprehensive analysis about the new way, the arguer can not convince me that the new way save electricity compared with old way.

The last but not least, assuming that the new way indeed uses up less electricity than older one, the reasoning that the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry would decline significantly is open to doubt. Firstly, whether the new method can be widely adopted is not ensured. It is entire possible that the facility used in new method is so expensive that most companies can not afford to. Or as the new method brings negative effects to environments, companies do not accept. Secondly, even if the new method was widely applied, the amount of electricity used in copper-extraction industry also might increase. For instance, when the total amount of copper extracted increases greatly, it is highly possible that the amount of electricity still keeps unchanged or rises.

To sum up, the argument is logically unacceptable due to the foregoing fallacies. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would better offer more information about the new copper-extracting technologies and its application in the copper-extraction industry.