In this set of materials, the writer and the lecturer cover the issue of "Smart Cars". The writer claims that the SC is beneficial listing three evidences. However, the professor opposes the writer by matching the rebutting each evidences.
To begin with, the professor argues that the fuel efficiency revealed to be pretty empty. In the actual test, the efficiency rate was 37/gallon though the promised rate was 70/gallon. This contracts the writer’s argument that the SC will decrease the worry about fuel cost in some extent.
On the top of that, contrary to the reading passage, the lecturer points out that the SC will worsen the traffic congestion. The professor makes her claim evidential by demonstrating the introduction of new car model. Historically, the introduction of new SUV turned out to increase the cars in the highway, and the SM showed the same manner. That is because the SM allows just two people to sit in, and this means that this new model will also result heavier traffic jam.
Finally, the lecturer contends that, in fact, the SC is not safe than some people thoughts. The reason is that this car is too small for other drivers to find it clearly. So even though the drivers of SC feel that they are safe in the car, they are increase the possibility of crash in reality. This casts on doubt on the writer’s claim that SC is safer than other cars. |