The author presents arguments argument that supports the claim that the carbon dioxide regulations set by the EU are difficult to be achieved. The explanation he gives for this argument is that the EU set vehicle emissions at 59 grams CO2/km while vehicles emit 120 g/km. To persuade the readers that the EU limits cannot be reached, the author explains that the most gifted engineers would not build ICEs that meet EU standards. Comment by Microsoft Office User: Be sure to state whether it is an appeal to reader’s emotions, logic, or something else. Lastly state whether the appeal was effect, and why.
According to the EU, the EVs transform roughly more than fifty-five to sixty percentages of the electrical energy of the terminal to strengthen the vehicle wheels. which is better than that of conventional gasoline vehicles. Conventional gasoline vehicles can only convert EVs roughly about twenty percentages of the energy saved in gasoline. So, the electric vehicles are very effective in the vehicle industry (Hanely, 2018). Comment by Microsoft Office User: Fix this. Comment by Microsoft Office User: Phrasing makes this a little difficult to understand.
But the another presented an argument that the EU’s formula is a scam because electric vehicles emit more carbon dioxide than gasoline and diesel vehicles. However, the EU assumes that electric vehicles do not emit carbon dioxide. He convinces the audience that the EU's formula is a scam by explaining that the power plants that are relied on by electric vehicles also emit substantial amounts of carbon dioxide. He also states that EV batteries are produced using fossil fuels, and this offsets the supposed emission reduction. Comment by Microsoft Office User: Wrong spelling. Comment by Microsoft Office User: Put this word in quotations Comment by Microsoft Office User: Use the author’s name. Comment by Microsoft Office User: Use the active voice. Comment by Microsoft Office User: What kind of appeal does the author make in this paragraph?
The author uses ethos by stating that he has published a research paper together with the physicist Christoph Buchal. This helps him establish authority over the leaders to ensure that they trust him. He also uses the publishing of research paper as pathos to persuade the reader that electronic vehicles emit more carbon dioxide than diesel cars. Another evidence to support the argument that EVs emit more carbon dioxide is the data published by Volkswagen. The author also presents further evidence that confirms EVs emit more carbon dioxide than diesel cars by explaining that the Austrian thinktank Johanneum Research and German ADAC confirmed the findings. Electronic vehicles must also drive 219,000 km to outperform diesel cars on emissions, however, cars do not last more than 180,000 km in Europe. Comment by Microsoft Office User: Good information presented in this paragraph. Be sure to discuss why the author’s presentation of this information was effective or ineffective.
The author analysed the issue very efficiently and added the ethos, pathos, and logos effectively in the paper. There are a lot of arguments in the paper that are supported by evidence. He concludes that the EU regulations will only cause more harm and that the EU should rely on market-based instruments. So, by conventional gasoline car, we cannot limit the harm but it is also analysed that electric vehicle emits more carbon die oxide than the conventional cars. Comment by Microsoft Office User: Briefly summarize these arguments.
References:
Hanely, S. (2018). ’Electric Car Myth Buster—Efficiency’. Clean Technica. Comment by Microsoft Office User: I’m not sure if you reviewed the right information as the title, name and reference entry looks very different from the one posted online.