Engineering Article Review Paper on Article critique

Article critique

The article seems insightful on the ability of the Toyota Prius to be a car that is not as ‘green’ as many environmentalists think. However, from the onset, the author fails to draw concrete and consistent linkages between his article’s headlines and the article’s subject content. Instead of following a comparative procedure, which assesses how each car contributes to environmental damage, he only deals with the Prius’ problems. Therefore, the author seems to consider how the Prius is made, but shows no link on how the Hummer is made so that the audience can form their own thoughts and assessments. Therefore, it seems that the author could be biased in his assessment.

Additionally, the author fails in some cases to define key terms that could help the audience understand his analogy. For instance, he assumes that all his audience is conversant with key terminology such as EPA and combined energy. However, in spite of these shortfalls, the author has been able to show how clearly the Prius could be environmentally damaging through the production process and transportation of nickel. However, despite the concrete research being performed, he fails to consider that Toyota Prius is not the only consumer of nickel produced, as other manufacturers in the electronics are also big consumers of the product. Therefore, assuming that the manufacture of Toyota Prius is the main polluter based on nickel produced is a farfetched ideology. Finally, the author’s conclusion does not entirely relate to his headline since he does not end with a summary of the subject content, but rather proceeds to add other car models that were not in the subject content of the article. Once again, he assumes that his intended has all the facts he possesses and therefore, can be able to make the same conclusions that the Prius is a lesser car as compared to models as the Scion or Chevy Aveo.