The following appeared in a memorandum written by the chairperson of the West Egg Town Council."Two years ago, consultants predicted that West Egg's landfill, which is used for garbage disposal, would be completely filled within five years. During the pas

The chairperson predicted that the landfill of the town would be full in five years. However, the forecast was made two years ago and now he/she is anticipating that the landfill would last longer than expected. During that two years, residents doubled the amount which they recycle the garbage. The chairperson is predicting more recycling since the cost for other household garbage pickup would double. Moreover, more than 9 out of 10 people responded that they would recycle more in the future in a survey. Even though the residents' willingness to recycle more is admirable, it does not guarantee that the landfill would last longer than forecasted.

The arguer suggested residents is recycling twice as much material compared to two years ago. However, the arguer fails to show evidence connecting increase in recycle and availability of the landfill. Household arbage consisting of recyclable and other garbage, additional recycling does not necessarily imply less other garbage. If the total household garbage increased so much that amount of trash buried in the landfill can rise even with more recycling. Therefore, the chairperson is ought to adduce statistical evidence that shows the decrease in household trash reaching to the landfill to strengthen his claim.

Unlike what chairperson asserted, the rise in garbage pickup fee might not affect the amount of recycled material. If the garbage pickup fee was originally small enough that the doubled fee does not influence household's decision-making process, the household would continue to recycle just the amount they have been doing. Even if the cost is considerable, the household can be inelastic in trash disposal, which means a change in the cost of trash pickup does not affect how much they throw out their trash. Therefore, any evidence showing the elasticity of household trash disposal and current pickup fee level is required to make the memorandum clearer.

The whole points made through the memorandum only focus on household generated garbage. However, nowhere in the memorandum says West Egg's landfill only collects trash from households. To validate the memorandum, the arguer should suggest evidence showing that the landfill is only or mostly filled with household trash. Industry garbage is usually humongous in amount and could be filling most of the landfill. Without considering industry trash, the chairperson cannot adequately foresee how fast the landfill would be full in the future.

Setting other things equal, the landfill would be filled up slower with more households recycling. Still, the arguer failed to list evidence that reveals the total amount of household trash is smaller or, at least, the same as two years ago. How the rise in garbage pickup fee would affect households is also not suggested. Industry garbage is totally ignored in the argument. Evidences showing above listed factors would affect the validity of the memorandum.