argument108 [0710G 戴三个表冲刺小组] 第25次作业

pinuoUID: 2328081

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: 504          TIME: 00:39:45          DATE: 2007-8-23 15:53:57

The author, in the newspaper, recommendates that Brenton power plant should use the old cooling system exclusively rather than a more efficient cooling system which will save more water and be more advantageous in environmental aspect. To support his recommendattion, the aurthor cites that the new system will be more costly because of the extra spend on the herbicide which is added to water in pipes to prevent algae accumulation which was found in Uptown, a power plant use the new cooling system. The recommendates is problematic in several aspects, thus render it unconvicing as it stands.

First of all, the author provide absolutely no evidence that algae accumulation will generate in the pipes of Brenton power plant if they use the new cooling system. It is entirely possible that algae accumulation was not derived from the new cooling system rather than the other factors of Uptown, where algae accumulation was found, such as the chemical quality of the waters of Uptown , and their inapproriate preprocess of water. If Brenton power plant don't share this problem with Uptown, the extra cost on agae or the herbicide added to water will not be necessary, thus to give up the new system will be unreasonable.

In addition, even algae accumulation will surely generated if the new cooling system is used in Brenton power, it is possible some other kinds of  hervicede, which will not harm river ecosystems as the hervicede used in Uptown, can be  added to the pipes, and the water containing this kind of herbicede can be safely released back into the river as the old cooling system used do.  If there are truely no such cleaning herbidcide can be found, scrubbing the pipes still can be another choice, though it will be costly as the author mentioned. Consider from an environmetal viewpoint,  it will turn out to be fair worth investment in a long term. There are conflict between economy and environmental protection, striking a balance between them will be more reasonable than mere consider the economic loss. If this reduce the profit dramaticly, the Brenton power can apply for the government fund support to help solve this problem.

Last but not the least, since the author failed to present evidence that there are only to systems available, it is highly possible there are other cooling system , which will be more efficient and less harmful to environment than the two system mentioned, or at least than the old system. In this circumstance, the old cooling system cannot be regard as the the only choice.

In sum, to convince me that the old cooling system should be used exclusively in Brenton power plant, the author should previde evidence that algae accumulation will surely generated if the new cooling system are used. And the author also need to clearly present the evidence that there are no envorinmental cleaning herbcied to deal with algae accumulation. To better asses the recomendation, I need the evidence there are no other alternatives besides the two systems mentioned.