argument71 0610G同主题写作第二期 & FLY AW小组第42次作业

夜一UID: 2130338

Argument71  第7篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：30分31秒     382 words
从2006年6月14日0时25分到2006年6月14日0时30分
------题目------
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.
------正文------
The arguer asserts that the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry will decline significantly. To support this conclusion, the arguer shows new copper-extracting technologies which can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the older method, especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high. However, the arguer's assertion is not convincing enough to be accepted by ordinary people.

First of all, it is unverified to claim that the new copper-extracting technologies can save electricity in extracting process. Although the new technologies can save a great deal of electricity when processing the same amount of ore, as the proportion of copper in the ore can vary considerably, no information indicates that the new technology can save electricity when producing the same amount of copper. Moreover, though the new technologies are especially efficiency with high copper proportion ore, no information shows that such technologies are desirable with the most commonly accessible kind of ore. Thus, if such technologies cannot extract the same amount of copper from the most available ore with less electricity, the declination of electricity using in copper-extracting process will not happen at all.

Besides, even if the new technologies can save electricity in copper-extracting process, it is unverified to deduce that such technologies will reduce electricity using in the entire copper-extraction industry. While using less electricity in the extracting process, such technologies may be extremely energy consuming in other processes, such as maintaining, cooling, and transporting. If the new copper-extracting technologies actually cost more electricity in the entire copper-extraction industry, no energy saving can be expected.

Furthermore, even if the new technologies can reduce electricity consumption in copper-extraction industry, it is unsubstantiated to claim that such technologies will be applied. As the profits of industry depends on the amount of investment and corresponding problems, if the new technologies are too expensive to be conducted, or if such technologies will induce severe problems such as serious pollutions, it is difficult for copper-extraction industry to use such technologies to replace the old methods. As whether the new technologies will be applied remains a question, it is unreasonable to expect electricity consumption declination.

In conclusion, neither has the arguer evaluated the new technologies' possible reduction of electricity consumption in copper-extraction industry, nor has he examined the possibility of application of such technologies. As a result, the arguer's assertion about the electricity using declination is unreasonable and unbelievable.

728AWUID: 2216408

The arguer asserts that the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry will decline significantly. To support this conclusion, the arguer shows new copper-extracting technologies which can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the older method, especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high. However, the arguer's assertion is not convincing enough to be accepted by ordinary people.开头要简洁，那句话还是和上一句加在一起用一句话概括吧，免得被ＥＴＳ认为是ＲＥＳＴＡＴＥ

First of all, it is unverified to claim that the new copper-extracting technologies can save electricity in extracting process. Although the new technologies can save a great deal of electricity when processing the same amount of ore, as此处ＡＳ是干吗用的？作为上一句的理由？不好吧 the proportion of copper in the ore can vary considerably／这句没什么用吧？, no information indicates that the new technology can save electricity when producing the same amount of copper. 到这个地方就戛然而止了感觉不没有深入，加写ＰＯＳＳＩＢＬＥ的情况就更好了Moreover, though the new technologies are especially efficiency with high copper proportion ore, no information shows that such technologies are desirable觉得这个词有点别扭.... with the most commonly accessible kind of ore. Thus, if such technologies cannot extract the same amount of copper from the most available ore with less electricity, the declination of electricity using in copper-extracting process will not happen at all.(整段大部分都在重复说这个东西是错误的,可是没有深入地指出一些情况来,最好多写些可能性情况,让论证更深入一些)
Besides, even if the new technologies can save electricity in copper-extracting process, it is unverified to deduce that such technologies will reduce electricity using in the entire copper-extraction industry. While using less electricity in the extracting process, such technologies may be extremely energy consuming in other processes, such as maintaining, cooling, and transporting. If the new copper-extracting technologies actually cost more electricity in the entire copper-extraction industry, no energy saving can be expected.
再看看原文关于40%的那段话,人家说省电是在整个process中的,这就包括了你论证的mainting,cooling等吧....换个别的错误点试试,感觉这个有点牵强

Furthermore, even if the new technologies can reduce electricity consumption in copper-extraction industry, it is unsubstantiated to claim that such technologies will be applied. As the profits of industry depends on the amount of investment and corresponding problems, if the new technologies are too expensive to be conducted, or if such technologies will induce severe problems such as serious pollutions, it is difficult for copper-extraction industry to use such technologies to replace the old methods. As whether the new technologies will be applied remains a question, it is unreasonable to expect electricity consumption declination.
这段很好， 论证深入!!

In conclusion, neither has the arguer evaluated the new technologies' possible reduction of electricity consumption in copper-extraction industry, nor has he examined the possibility of application of such technologies. As a result, the arguer's assertion about the electricity using declination is unreasonable and unbelievable.

总体来看， 条理还是很清晰的,比我条理明确多了,也希望夜一回头给YY看看~~多谢指点~;)
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... e%3D1#pid1768819142

夜一UID: 2130338

谢谢修改，都是些很好的建议：）

不过我觉得呢，原题中的那个40%本身就很不具体，连具体对那种矿是要用多少电提炼出多少铜都没有说清楚，更别说是炼铜工业的其他步骤了
我认为这是逻辑错误中一个以点盖全的典型，至少是个含糊不清的情况