Arguement Essay evaluation

[kraft79]

This is my first practice essay. I need a lot of help


The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building to its manager.

"One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately one-third of its original flow. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. Clearly, restricting water flow throughout all the twenty floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase our profits further."

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

In this argument, the owner of an apartment building is attempting to rationalize the installation of low flow shower heads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers. The owner does provide proof for the change. However, the proof is full of questions, which make it not strong enough to reach the conclusion.
First of all, the owner states that changing to low flow showerheads will obviously result in a considerable savings on the water utility bill. The biggest unanswered question is what these savings will amount to. There are no readings of water usage before and after the switch available. Without actual numbers, the author is basing this change on assumption rather than fact . There is a possibility that the low flow showerheads could increase the water utility bill. Maybe the tenants will have to take longer showers to fully rinse themselves.
Secondly, the building owner states that there have only been a few complaints regarding the installation of the showerheads. Few is a very broad description, and needs to be numerically defined. The first five out of twenty floors have been the test group for the showerheads. The owner is building his case around a minority opinion. There is a chance that the opinion of the remaining residents will be negative towards the showerheads. People who are unhappy in their apartments might seek alternative housing. Loosing tenants would instantly negate any water utility savings.
Thirdly, the building owner never addresses the initial set up costs for changing the showerheads. Materials, labor, and time for twenty floors of work adds up quickly. Will the actual savings the owner speaks of exceed the costs to make the swap? There needs to be a cost vs. savings breakdown included to show the initial, short term, and long term savings.
In conclusion, the building owner has attempted to prove that making the switch to low flow showerheads will save on Sunnyside Tower’s monthly water bill. The proof that is provided, is full of questions , which make it not strong enough to reach the conclusion.

[tommywallach]

Hey Kraft,

Very well done. You hit the three major points here I'd want to see hit. The one thing I'd say is that you should get to your point as quickly as possible in each paragraph, then go into detail AFTER the main point. For example, the main point in the first paragraph is that low-flow showerheads might lead people to take LONGER showers in order to get clean, thus rendering equal or even increasing the amount of water needed. You get there, but not until the end of the paragraph. I'd open with that, then go into details.

Loosing = losing

Otherwise, very well done. Make sure you leave spaces/indentations to separate your paragraphs, and double-check spelling/grammar at the end. Good work!

-t