Revised Introduction

Below is my revised introduction. I have improved greatly upon the original introduction by following the points in the Student's Guide on pages 52-53. In my original introduction used an ancedote to start the essay and hook the reader. However, in the improved introduction I used a statistic out of the article I am analyzing. This clearly hooked the reader in my opinion and then it provided excellent forecasting to lead the reader in the direction my essay will be taking. I kept the same thesis as before because it is my final thesis.

O' Rourke, Alan. "Too Busy To Improve - Performance Management - Square Wheels" 10/22/2014 via flickr.com Attribution 2.0 Generic

Original Introduction

Scientists have warned countries that climate change caused by the wide use of fossil fuels has caused the climate to rapidly change. The scientists analysis of the dramatic global increase of average temperature and the increase in sporadic weather patterns has validated their claims.  This has forced companies, large organizations, and countries to invest heavily in renewable resources. One organization, the UK Atomic Authority has garnered support for a nuclear fusion experiment funded by the US, China, India, Russia, and numerous other countries. This global initiative has been realized, planned, and now funded because of a the analysis done by environmental scientists cross the global.  One of these scientists, Steven Cowley, wrote an article about nuclear fusion, called "Is Nuclear Fusion the Best Way to Support Rising Energy Demands?".   Cowley uses rhetorical devices such as contextual examples, use of organized chronological styles, and his own reputation of the CEO of the UK Atomic Energy Authority to effectively sway his audience into believing that nuclear fusion is the only way to create an economy based on sustainable energy.

Improved Introduction

A nuclear fusion power plant is projected to use only 425 kiloliters of fuel in one year (Cowley). This may sound like a high consumption rate but when comparing it to the amount of gasoline the average American uses in a year, the power plant uses significantly less . Statistics show that each year a driver in America purchases a whopping 429 gallons of fuel (eia.gov). But a nuclear fusion power plant uses only 112 gallons of fuel when converted. Theoretically, these power plants could create enough energy to replace the coal, natural gas, and nuclear power plants found in America that powers the homes and businesses we use everyday. Steven Cowley, a professor of physics at Imperial College wrote an article in worldfinance.com about "Is Nuclear Fusion the Best Way to Support Rising Energy Demands?" arguing this point. He employed rhetorical strategies, understanding of his intended audience and the use of logical thinking to convince his readers that nuclear fusion is the only way to run an economy on sustainable energy.  In this paper, we will analyze whether or not Cowley was effective in his use of rhetorical strategies to convey the purpose of the article to his readership. Cowley uses rhetorical devices such as contextual examples, use of an organized chronological based style of writing, and his own reputation as the CEO of the UK Atomic Energy Authority to effectively sway his audience into believing that nuclear fusion is the only way to create an economy based on sustainable energy.