argument71[jet]第六次作业

hds123523000UID: 2454889

TOPIC: 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.
WORDS: 328         TIME: 00:29:32          DATE: 2008-2-14 14:26:30

The conclusion, from the author's article, which is that we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly, supported by a now method resulting in less electricity than before, seems reasonable, but at the second glance, there are some flaws in the analysis.
   First of all, the author fails to show any information about how many ores and the average proportion of copper in total in this area, which is a very important clue for this argument. As this article says that new technologies can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the old method, we should think about the amount of ores first. If there is not too many ores and so old method cost little electricity, will there be too much decline of electricity even if we take the action of new method?
    Secondly, details about the new technologies are too vague, especially the cost of new method. As everyone knows, whether an action can be taken depend on its cost, which is including labor cost, time cost and money cost. There is a possibility which can not be ignore that the new technologies need a lot of time, labor, or money, even they cost little electricity. This means that the new method will not be used, lent alone the decline of electricity.
What is more, a considerable possibility that ore industry trends popular is out of author’s argument. It is reasonable that more and more people devote themselves into copper-extraction, while the new method is better than the old one because it cost less electricity and lower the cost. Thus, we can not conclude there will be decline of electricity in total because of more and more ores.     
    In sum, the conclusion is not reasonable. To strengthen the conclusion, the author should introduce all the new method's advantages and disadvantages. What's more, the author also should give some information about ores, which can make the argument more comprehensive.     

cascadeUID: 2454141

The conclusion, from the author's article(我觉得用argument比较好), which is that we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly, supported by a now method resulting in less electricity than before, seems reasonable, but at the second glance, there are some flaws in the analysis.

   First of all, the author fails to show any information about how many ores and the average proportion of copper in total in this area, which is a very important clue for this argument. As this article says that new technologies can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the old method, we should think about the amount of ores first. If there is not too many ores and so old method cost little electricity, will there be too much decline of electricity even if we take the action of new method?

    Secondly, details about the new technologies are too vague, especially the cost of new method. As everyone knows, whether an action can be taken depend on its cost, which is including labor cost, time cost and money cost. There is a possibility which cannot be ignore that the new technologies need a lot of time, labor, or money, even they cost little electricity. This means that the new method will not be used, let alone the decline of electricity.

What is more, a considerable possibility that ore industry trends popular is out of author’s argument. It is reasonable that more and more people devote themselves into copper-extraction, while the new method is better than the old one because it cost less electricity and lower the cost. Thus, we cannot conclude there will be decline of electricity in total because of more and more ores.     

    In sum, the conclusion is not reasonable. To strengthen the conclusion, the author should introduce all the new method's advantages and disadvantages. What's more, the author also should give some information about ores, which can make the argument more com
谢谢你的评点，我又写了一次，在你的留言后边。我觉得在你的论述中原文有一个比较大的错误你没指出来，就是在两者相比较时，新老方法的比较只限于同等数量的矿石，而不是同等数量，且铜含量也相等的矿石。