Argument 108请多指教

prometricUID: 2679386

请多指教，不胜感激！拍我者请留链接，必回拍。


TOPIC: ARGUMENT108 - The following appeared in a Brenton newspaper.

"The Brenton power plant draws water from Scott's River for its cooling system and releases the warmed water back into the river. The town council recommends that the plant install a more efficient cooling system that uses less water, claiming it will be more environmentally sound. However, in Uptown, where the new system is used, a study found that the complex network of pipes in the new system tends to accumulate algae. The build up of algae can be avoided by scrubbing the pipes, which is costly, or by adding an herbicide to the water in the pipes to prevent algae accumulation. But water containing the herbicide cannot be released back into the river and it is known that low water levels can harm river ecosystems accustomed to higher levels. Therefore, Brenton power plant should continue to use the old cooling system exclusively."
WORDS: 522          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2009-8-8 18:07:02

The author argues against the new cooling system for the reason that the new system would cost much more if don't add herbicide to the water to prevent the accumulation of algae. However, there are some flaws with in the author's reasoning line which made the argument invalid.

The first problem is author's point about the accumulation of algae. The conclusion of the study concerning with the possible accumulation of algae is quite vague, since it does not tell us under what condition will this accumulation happen and whether this accumulation would do harm to the pipe or environment. So we can not conclude from the study that this kind of accumulation would surely happen under the contemporary pipe structure of the new cooling system and if there is necessity to prevent this from happening. There is no evidence that this accumulation would damage pipes to threaten the safety of this cooling system, and as for environmental effect, the author's description -- "accumulate" -- suggests that this kind of algae does exists in the input water. Since algae probably exists in the origin river, we cannot conclude that it will harm the environment letting alone their accumulation in pipe system does not suggests a higher dense in the released water.

Even if the author was true on the above problem that there is necessity for the new system  to prevent the accumulation, there are still some other problems. For example, we still cannot know from the given information whether the great cost scrubbing the pipes is worthy. Maybe it is because the ecosystem and environment means long-term benefits and will greatly influence Brenton's development and living condition in the future. The author rules out this choise too hasty. And then the author also makes mistakes considering the water level. There is possibility that by adding to the new cooling system only simple instruments can the plant be able to clean up all the remaining herbicide in the water they are going to release. Or this kind of herbicide would decompose quickly before water being released and thus do little harm to the livings in the river. Thus there may be possible that the plant release the water back into the river and the use of new system would not lead to a decrease in water level of the river.

The author's suggestion that keeping use the old system does not solve the problem -- the possible negative influence on ecosystem remains. And to our common knowledge, the longer one system is used, the more problems it will bring about. There maybe more machine malfunctions and the reliability of the system may decline thus safety would becomes a problem. And the maintain cost may significantly increase and may even exceed the cost of the new system thus the new system would saves money for taxpayers.

In conclusion, the writer's argument lacks reasonable support and he/she needs more evidence to strengthen his/her position. The author could think of other ways to solve the problem like adding to the old system instruments that can use the waste heat to for family heating or producing electricity.