The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper.
In order to avoid the serious health threats associated with many landfills, our municipality should build a plant for burning trash. An incinerator could offer economic as well as ecological advantages over the typical old-fashioned type of landfill: incinerators can be adapted to generate moderate amounts of electricity, and ash residue from some types of trash can be used to condition garden soil.
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
This newspaper editorial concludes that our city should build a plant for burning trash in order to avoid the serious health threats associated with many landfills. The author adds that an incinerator could offer economic benefits as well, since incinerators can be adapted to generate small amounts of electricity for other uses, and since ash residue from some kinds of trash can be used as a soil conditioner. Even if these claims are true, the authors argument is unconvincing in three important respects.
To begin with, the author fails to consider health threats posed by incinerating trash. It is possible, for example, that respiratory problems resulting from the air pollution caused by burning trash might be so extensive that they would outweigh the health risks associated with landfills. If so, the authors conclusion that switching to incineration would be more salutary for public health would be seriously undermined.
Secondly, the author assumes that discontinuing landfill operations would abate the heath threats they now pose. However, this is not necessarily the case. It is possible that irreversible environmental damage to subterranean water supplies, for example, has already occurred. In this event, changing from landfills to incinerators might not avoid or abate serious public health problems.
Thirdly, the authors implicit claim that incinerators are economically advantageous to landfills is poorly supported. Only two small economic benefits of incineration are mentioned, while the costs associated with either burning trash or switching refuse disposal systems are ignored. In all likelihood, such costs would be significant, and may very well outweigh the economic benefits.
In conclusion, the authors argument provides inadequate justification for switching from one disposal system to the other. As it stands, the argument takes into account only a limited number of benefits from the change, while addressing none of its costs. To better evaluate the argument, we must first examine all the health risks posed by each refuse disposal system and conduct a thorough cost-benefit analysis of each system, taking account of the cost of the new system, the cost of the changeover itself, and the expected costs to the community of health problems resulting from each system.
2012年12月英语六级翻译练习与解析
2012年12月英语六级翻译冲刺特训(2)
2012年12月英语六级翻译练习与解析(3)
2015年6月英语四级翻译习题及参考译文:茶文化
2015年6月英语四级翻译习题及参考译文:中西方饮食习惯
2012年12月英语六级考试翻译练习(6)
2011年12月英语六级考试翻译答案
2012年英语四六级翻译提高必备短语总结
2012年12月英语六级考试翻译练习(4)
2015年6月英语四级翻译习题及参考译文汇总
2015年6月英语四级翻译练习及解析:教育公平
2015年6月英语四级翻译习题及参考译文:送礼
2015年6月英语六级翻译题型策略指点
分享2012年6月英语六级翻译答案
英语六级考试完形填空的的常考词汇词组(21)
2015年6月英语四级考试翻译预测题及译文:留守儿童
2015年6月英语四级考试翻译预测题及译文:三手烟
英语六级考试翻译模拟练习(3)
2015年6月英语四级翻译预测题及译文:睡眠紊乱症
2015年6月英语四级翻译预测题及译文:毛笔
2015年6月英语四级翻译习题及参考译文:蒙古族牧民
2012年12月英语六级考试翻译练习(5)
2011年12月大学英语六级翻译题
英语六级考试翻译的模拟练习(4)
2012年12月英语六级翻译冲刺特训(4)
2014年12月大学英语六级翻译真题:汉语文化
英语六级考试翻译的模拟练习(5)
2015年6月英语四级翻译习题及参考译文:光棍节
2015年6月英语四级翻译预测题及译文汇总
2012年12月英语六级翻译冲刺特训(3)
不限 |
英语教案 |
英语课件 |
英语试题 |
不限 |
不限 |
上册 |
下册 |
不限 |