GRE写作官方题库高频ARGUMENT题目满分范文分享：construction of new electric plants
- 2020年04月22日13:21 来源：小站整理
- 参与（0） 阅读（250）
The following appeared in a memorandum from the planning department of an electric power company:
"Several recent surveys indicate that homeowners are increasingly eager to conserve energy and manufacturers are now marketing many home appliances, such as refrigerators and air conditioners that are almost twice as energy-efficient as those sold a decade ago. Also, new technologies for better home insulation and passive solar heating are readily available to reduce the energy needed for home heating. Therefore, we anticipate that the total demand for electricity in our area will not increase, and may decline slightly. Since our three electric generating plants in operation for the past 20 years have always met our needs, construction of new generating plants should not be necessary."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author of this memo concludes that there is no need for an additional electric power plant in the area because total electricity demand in the area is not likely to increase in the future. To support this conclusion the author cites the availability of new energy-efficient appliances and systems for homes, and the eagerness of area homeowners to conserve energy. However, the argument relies on several questionable assumptions.
First, the author's projection for flat or declining total demand for electricity ignores business and commercial electricity usage. It is entirely possible that area businesses will increase their use of electricity in the future and that total electricity consumption will actually increase despite flat or declining residential demand. The author's projection also ignores the possibility that the number of area residents will increase in the future, thereby resulting in an increase in electricity usage regardless of whether more efficient appliances are used in area homes. Without taking these possibilities into account the recommendation above is incomplete.
Secondly, the author's conclusion relies on the assumption that area residents have the capability and will purchase the energy-saving appliances and systems that are currently available. Admittedly, the author points out homeowners are "eager to conserve energy." Nevertheless, these homeowners might not be able to afford these new systems and appliances. Moreover, the energy-efficient insulation that the author mentions might only be available for new home construction. In that case, the mere availability of this system will have no effect on total electric usage in existing homes.
A final problem involves the assertion that no new electric power plants are needed because the three existing plants, which are 20 years old, have always been adequate for the area's electric needs. The author fails to account for the possibility that the old plants are themselves less energy efficient than a new plant using new technology would be, or that the old plants need to be replaced due to their age, or for some other reason. Besides, this assertion ignores the possible influx of residents or businesses in the future, thereby increasing the demand for electricity beyond what the three existing plants can meet.