Conclusion There should be a greater use of gasohol. ███████ ██ █ ███████ ██ ███████ ███ █████████ ███ ███ █ ██████ ██████ ██████ ███ █████ ██████ ████████ █████████ ████ ████████ █████████ ███████ ███████ ████ ██ ████ ██████ ███████ ██ ███ ██████████ ████ ██████ ██████ ██ ███████████████
The author concludes gasohol should get more use. Why? Because plants can remove the amount of carbon dioxide gasohol produces, gasohol has a higher octane rating than gasoline, and burning gasohol emits less carbon monoxide than burning gasoline.
The author assumes that gasohol and gasoline would be used for the same purpose, and that there’s no advantage to using gasoline over gasohol that outweighs the apparent benefits of gasohol.
Each of the following, if █████ ███████████ ███ ████████ █████ ███████
Cars run less ████ ██ ████████ ████ ████ ██ ██ ████████
This strengthens the argument by ruling out a potential weakness of gasohol. It’s another reason to favor gasohol over straight gasoline.
Since less gasoline ██ ██████ ████ ███ ███ ██ ████████ ██ ██████ ████████ ██ ████ ███████
This strengthens the argument by providing another advantage to gasohol: it would save on gasoline usage, reducing the risk of an energy shortage.
Cars burn on ███ ███████ ████████ ████ ███████ ███ █████████ ████ ████ ██ █████████
This is a disadvantage to using gasohol, not an advantage. It implies drivers will have to refill their vehicles more often if gasohol is used widely.
Gasohol is cheaper ██ ███████ ███ █████ █████ ████ ██ ███ ████ ████ █████████
This strengthens the argument by ruling out a potential weakness. It eliminates the possibility that gasohol is more expensive than gasoline.
Burning gasoline adds ████ ██████ ███████ ██ ███ ██████████ ████ ██████ ███ ███████
This strengthens the argument by implying gasohol—which adds less carbon dioxide to the atmosphere than plants can remove—produces less carbon dioxide than gasoline. It’s an advantage to making the switch.