GMAT Essays (AWA)

I know reviewing essays are not particularly common, yet can somebody please give the worst possible comment on the essay below. Please try to give me points that would improve my essay, instead of simply giving a 1 or a 2.


The following appeared in a newspaper editorial:
'The claims of some politicians that we are on the brink of an energy crisis are misguided. We have enough oil in reserve to see us through any production shortage and the supply of in-ground oil is in no danger of running out any time soon. There is thus no need to set aside the technology and infrastructure of a century of oil based energy'


The author states that the claims of some politicians that we are on the brink of an energy crisis are misguided. He says that we have enough oil reserves to overcome any production shortages. He also claims that we have good enough in-ground oil supply. He thus concludes that we need not set aside the technology and infrastructure of a century of oil based energy and we need to carry on with the same, The conclusion put forward by the author is based upon assumptions that are faulty and the points he puts forward have not been backed up by proper evidences.
The author mentions that the supply of in-ground supply of oil is not in a danger of running out any time soon. He however does not mention how long is long enough . Even a supply of oil enough for next hundred years could not be said to be enough supply of oil . Shifting from one source to another is not a swift process and the change may sometimes take decades to complete. Moreover, enough supply of oil does not guarantee that all the supply of oil can be extracted with the given technoloy and resources. We have seen the Great Economic Crisis of the 1970s where we had a lot of supplies of oil but could not extract it with the resources available.
Also, he mentions that we have enough oil reserve to see us through any production shortage. The question again is how long do we plan to rely on the reserve of oil . We might have oil reserves enough to last a year, or may be two. But does that mean that the reserves will outlast the production shortages? Lets consider the chances of a war in large scale. What if the countries producing the oil are not able to supply the oil for more than five years due to the war?
The author also fails to mention the location of the in -ground supply and the reserves . Can we rely completely upon the resources of other countries? And can we be a hundred percent sure that the countries will keep their supply steady?
The author misses to foresee the possibility of bad relations with the countries where supply of oil is abundant. International politics may play a role at any time and the relations may go south.
Last and most important, the author fails to look at the other reasons why we need to set aside the technology and infrastructure of oil based economy. Supply shortage is not the only reason behind it. The more important reason to make the shift is the impact the oil based energy is having on the environment. We may never run out of the supply but the oil based energy is depleting the environment every moment. The real reason to look out for another source of energy could be anything other than just the limited supply of oil.
Thus, the author needs to consider and mention a number of other factors to make an impressive reasoning. The author needs to avoid using vague words like enough and any time soon. The author also needs the think from multiple prospectives before reaching a conclusion. The passage can be made more conclusive by inserting facts and finding before reaching any conclusions.

Hi gmatasap.

That essay is decent. I give it at least a 4, and maybe it gets 4.5. I may be wrong though as there are some punctuation issues, such as commas where periods should be, and for all I know the computer would really hit you for those.

One area in which the essay breaks down a little is here.

"Also, he mentions that we have enough oil reserve to see us through any production shortage. The question again is how long do we plan to rely on the reserve of oil . We might have oil reserves enough to last a year, or may be two ...


... The author misses to foresee the possibility of bad relations with the countries where supply of oil is abundant. International politics may play a role at any time and the relations may go south."

Your paragraph structure became a little freaky at that point.

Here's a minor point. "evidences" should be merely "evidence."

This sentence needs a comma before the "and".

The conclusion put forward by the author is based upon assumptions that are faulty (comma) and the points he puts forward have not been backed up by proper evidences.

Also, you used commas rather than periods at the ends of some sentences. I suspect that the computer could really ding you for those, as it might wonder where the sentences end.

There are many other sentences that need commas before conjunctions or to set modifiers apart from the rest of the sentence.

A time is not "where" something happened. A time is "when" or "during which" something happened.

"Great Economic Crisis of the 1970s, during which"

You need quotation marks here.

The author needs to avoid using vague words like "enough" and "any time soon".

Maybe skip a line between paragraphs.

Every sentence, basically, in this paragraph starts with "The". I wonder whether somehow your sentence structure could be more varied and sophisticated, as could your word choices.

"Thus, the author needs to consider and mention a number of other factors to make an impressive reasoning. The author needs to avoid using vague words like enough and any time soon. The author also needs the think from multiple prospectives before reaching a conclusion. The passage can be made more conclusive by inserting facts and finding before reaching any conclusions."

That concluding paragraph basically gets the job done but could be somehow better structured and wrapped up better. I mean it's just a bunch of suggestions, and so its rhythm and what it says could be somehow more sophisticated and more complete.

Overall, as I said, this is a decent essay. I think that maybe the first thing to do is maybe to be a little more careful with details. Put commas and periods where they belong, do things like consistently saying "reserves", rather than bouncing back and forth between "reserve" and "reserves", and make sure that you structure paragraphs in ways that make sense.

Then maybe write a concluding paragraph that wraps things up a little better. The suggestions were good. How about some overall evaluation to go with them?

Having done that, you probably would be done with the project if you will be satisfied with a 4 - 5 score.

Then maybe you could seek to take your sentence structure and overall structure to another level.

Dear Marty Murray
Thankyou for taking time to read the essay and give really constructive suggestions.

You mention the follows :
One area in which the essay breaks down a little is here.
"Also, he mentions that we have enough oil reserve to see us through any production shortage. The question again is how long do we plan to rely on the reserve of oil . We might have oil reserves enough to last a year, or may be two ...
... The author misses to foresee the possibility of bad relations with the countries where supply of oil is abundant. International politics may play a role at any time and the relations may go south."
Your paragraph structure became a little freaky at that point.

Do I leave the lines altogether or do I rephrase the lines. I wanted to bring out the point that, we cannot rely upon the reserves of oil, they are always limited and will eventually be used up.
I also wanted to mention that the political relations with Oil Producing Countries could deteriorate at any time, which would decrease the supply of oil form those countries, and we could eventually be in a problem.

I will definitely work on concluding the essays better.
Thankyou for everything.

Gmatasap

Gmatasap wrote:You mention the follows :
One area in which the essay breaks down a little is here.
"Also, he mentions that we have enough oil reserve to see us through any production shortage. The question again is how long do we plan to rely on the reserve of oil . We might have oil reserves enough to last a year, or may be two ...
... The author misses to foresee the possibility of bad relations with the countries where supply of oil is abundant. International politics may play a role at any time and the relations may go south."
Your paragraph structure became a little freaky at that point.

Do I leave the lines altogether or do I rephrase the lines. I wanted to bring out the point that, we cannot rely upon the reserves of oil, they are always limited and will eventually be used up.

One thing you could do is to put some of those ideas into one paragraph. Some of them address the assertion that abundance in terms of in ground supply means sufficiency in terms of supply. So they would work together to show that the presence of in ground supply does not necessarily equal sufficient available supply. You could even combine the reserves ideas with the in ground supply ideas to show that presence of oil somewhere does not necessarily indicate that availability is assured.

Either way, my point is that those sentences could be better organized into one or two coherent paragraphs.

Thankyou for taking time to read the essay and give really constructive suggestions.

Sure thing.