"Several recent surveys indicate that home owners are increasingly eager to conserve energy. At the same time, 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, 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 twenty years have always met our needs, construction of new generating plants will not be necessary."
In this argument, the author claims that home owners are increasingly eager to conserve energy. The author's reasoning does not entirely support his premise, and he adds irrelevant information that does not support his claim as well. He also creates confusion in the reader's minds as he does not clearly state basic information about the claim. Therefore, the author's argument can be considered flawed and incomplete.
To begin, the author's first two pieces of evidence do not support the claim sufficiently. He states that manufacturers are marketing more energy efficient appliances and that new technology has reduced the energy needed for home heating. These statements do not support the claim that home owners are increasingly eager to conserve energy because they fail to refer to the actual home owners. Instead, the author gives information on how the manufacturers and new technologies are energy efficient. It is never mentioned that the home owners actually buy and incorporate these energy conserving appliances into their homes. If the author wants to correctly support his claim, he should include how these new discoveries in conserving energy are used by the home owners.
Also, the author conclusion that states that "the total demand for electricity in our area will not increase — and may decline slightly" is not supported by any previous evidence in the argument. Although the conclusion does support the premise, it becomes confusing to the reader because no facts are given that lead to this particular conclusion. Also, I find it very opaque that the author states about the electricity demand in his "area." After reading that statement, I begin to wonder where he is basing his argument off of. Is it in America? Is it in a different country? Since the author does not specify where he is basing this argument from, the reader becomes confused after reading the conclusion. To improve upon this issue, the author should give more specifics of where he is conducting this argument from in order to eliminate any confusion. He should also make sure that his evidence supports both his premise and conclusion.
Finally, the author adds an unrelated statement to the end of his argument. After stating his conclusion, the author adds that, "Since our three electric generating plants in operation for the past twenty years have always met our needs, construction of new generating plants will not be necessary." This statement has nothing to do with the premise of the argument. Therefore, the author should completely eradicate this part of the argument.
In conclusion, the author makes many errors in his reasoning of the claim that home owners are increasingly eager to conserve energy. The author should make sure that his supporting evidence has relevance to his claim. He should also eliminate the unnecessary statement at the end of his argument. Lastly, the author should make sure his argument is very clear about what area the claim is being made about. This argument is extremely flawed; and therefore, it should be considered unsubstantial.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-30 | stevewang1007 | 55 | view |
| 2019-12-21 | Daffodilia | 81 | view |
| 2019-11-17 | samira@ | 59 | view |
| 2019-11-13 | Ramkal | 42 | view |
| 2019-10-29 | Noma Ahmad | 16 | view |
- Democracy is when the indigent, and not the men of property, are the rulers. 16
- "Several recent surveys indicate that home owners are increasingly eager to conserve energy. At the same time, manufacturers are now marketing many home appliances, such as refrigerators and air conditioners, that are almost twice as energy efficient 23
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK. need to argue:
'Several recent surveys indicate that home owners are increasingly eager to conserve energy. At the same time, 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.'
//maybe people buy more home appliances.
argument 2 -- not OK. need to argue:
'Also, new technologies for better home insulation and passive solar heating are readily available to reduce the energy needed for home heating. Therefore, the total demand for electricity in our area will not increase — and may decline slightly. '
//maybe new technologies are very expensive and people don't want to purchase.
argument 3 -- not exactly.
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 28 15
No. of Words: 499 350
No. of Characters: 2520 1500
No. of Different Words: 201 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.726 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.05 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.648 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 188 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 130 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 100 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 68 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.821 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.031 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.536 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.346 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.507 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.184 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 360, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...rmation about the claim. Therefore, the authors argument can be considered flawed and i...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 572, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this energy' or 'these energies'?
Suggestion: this energy; these energies
...ome owners actually buy and incorporate these energy conserving appliances into their homes....
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 381, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'opaques'?
Suggestion: opaques
...icular conclusion. Also, I find it very opaque that the author states about the electr...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, finally, first, if, lastly, may, so, therefore, well, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 63.0 28.8173652695 219% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 16.3942115768 159% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2620.0 2260.96107784 116% => OK
No of words: 500.0 441.139720559 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72870804502 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85529963401 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.426 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 831.6 705.55239521 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 4.96107784431 262% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 15.0 8.76447105788 171% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 56.3151003954 57.8364921388 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.769230769 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2307692308 23.324526521 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.19230769231 5.70786347227 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 15.0 6.88822355289 218% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.115769370587 0.218282227539 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0490879870194 0.0743258471296 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0855331095945 0.0701772020484 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0797301208327 0.128457276422 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0821622897616 0.0628817314937 131% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.3550499002 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.5979740519 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.96 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 98.500998004 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 12.3882235529 73% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.