argument71[jet小组第六次作业]

huangli711UID: 2451421

Argument 71：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

字数：402      时间：00：30：00   

As the arguer asserted in this passage, whose conclusion is the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly, his evidence to support this conclusion is new-copper-extracting technologies can be used and which would save 40 percent less electricity than the former method. Yet, these assertions are far away from warrant to draw this conclusion.

Firstly, this new method might save electricity sometimes, but not all the time. As the arguer said in this passage,
the proportion of copper in the ore can vary considerably, and if it is low, a large amounts of electric energy would be required. So, no matter whether the copper-extracting technologies have improved, the amount of electricity would not be declined when the proportion of copper in the ore is low enough. So the saving energy method only could shorten the sort of cost of energy at per ton, and could make no difference on the amount of electricity.

Add to the proportion of copper, no evidence in this argument could warrant the new method really could reduce the cost of energy by 40 percent. We need some academic study to illustrate these words, and there must be some true sample to support this point. Because, as the arguer motioned in the argument, until fairly recently the only way to extract pure copper from ore was by using an electricity costing process, and the new method of extracting is just improved in some extend, the basic technology has not been changed. So even if this saving method works, the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry might be decline in some extend, rather than significantly changed like describe in the passage.

Thirdly, no single word in this argument has ever mentioned the demand of copper in the next year. As we know, the demand would some sort of decide how much the factory should supply to. If during the next year, the demand of copper increase doubled with some hurried industry establishment, even the improved method could reduce the 40 percent of electricity; the amount would not decrease or might be increase if the proportion of copper in the ore is low.

In sum, this argument is a failure in concluding the amount of electricity used by copper-extraction industry would be declined significantly. Because this passage lacks of the academic study on the new method and the property predict of the future market.




多谢修改~~

txjlionUID: 2445370

As the arguer asserted in this passage, whose conclusion is the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly, his evidence to support this conclusion is new-copper-extracting technologies can be used and which would save 40 percent less electricity than the former method.（第一句话貌似句子的主干是两个名词，没有谓语。whose和his后面接的都是后置定语） Yet, these assertions are far away from warrant to draw this conclusion.

Firstly, this new method might save electricity sometimes, but not all the time. As the arguer said in this passage,
the proportion of copper in the ore can vary considerably, and if it is low, a large amounts of electric energy would be required. So, no matter whether the copper-extracting technologies have improved, the amount of electricity would not be declined when the proportion of copper in the ore is low enough. So the saving energy method only could shorten the sort of cost of energy at per ton, and could make no difference on the amount of electricity.

Add to the proportion of copper, no evidence in this argument could warrant the new method really could reduce the cost of energy by 40 percent. We need some academic study to illustrate these words, and there must be some true sample to support this point. Because, as the arguer motioned in the argument, until fairly recently the only way to extract pure copper from ore was by using an electricity costing process, and the new method of extracting is just improved in some extend, the basic technology has not been changed.两个完整的句子，不能使用“，”来隔开，所以应该注意适当的时候短句。 So even if this saving method works, the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry might be decline in some extend, rather than significantly changed like describe in the passage.

Thirdly, no single word in this argument has ever mentioned the demand of copper in the next year. As we know, the demand would some sort of decide how much the factory should supply to. If during the next year, the demand of copper increase doubled with（后面的变化引起了前面的需要，其实前后为因果关系，所以这里建议使用because of） some hurried industry establishment（这种结构的惯用法一般是the establishment of some hurried industry ） even the improved method could reduce the 40 percent of electricity; the amount would not decrease or might be increase if the proportion of copper in the ore is low.

In sum, this argument is a failure in concluding the amount of electricity used by copper-extraction industry would be declined significantly. Because this passage lacks of the academic study on the new method and the property predict of the future market.（最后一段总结的很简练，好）


文中多处地方实用相同的情态动词，最好的换换，这样看起来更舒服。
总体写的不错

：）