Even though trading in ivory has been outlawed by international agreement, some piano makers still use ivory, often obtained illegally, to cover piano keys.
Conclusion (therefore)
The development of synthetic ivory will probably do little to help curb the killing of elephants for their tusks.
Evidence
Experts have devised a synthetic ivory that has found favor with concert pianists worldwide, but piano makers have never been major consumers of ivory.
Evaluate
This is an Anti-Causal argument. The author thinks that the new synthetic ivory will do little to reduce elephants' being hunted for their tusks.
It will reduce demand for ivory from pianists, but the author is saying that's a negligible slice of the ivory market.
GIVEN THAT piano makers are just a tiny slice of the ivory market HOW COULD WE ARGUE THAT synthetic ivory *will* make a big difference in terms of elephants' being hunted for their tusks?
It seems very possible that other segments of the ivory market could ALSO find that synthetic ivory is a suitable substitute. Maybe a huge source of ivory demand is for bathroom tile, and tile manufacturers are totally down with using synthetic ivory instead.
Goal
Let's look for an answer that rules out an objection like or that otherwise makes it more likely that even though synthetic ivory is available, most ivory-users will continue to want the real ivory that we get from elephant tusks.