▶ Your Answer : In this set of issues, both the reading passage and the speaker discuss several alternative ways of burning coal. To be specific, according to the reading passage, converting coal into a gas, using a form of static electricity, and fabric filters would replace traditional technology. However, the speaker challenges these explanations because they would have also serious drawbakcs. To begin with, the lecturer claims that converting coal into a gas in not a good way. This is because other fossil fuels should be heated in order to use this method, and as a result, harmful emission cannot help but be emerged. In addition, in this technology, removing impurities requires a lot of water, and in this process, water pollution would be caused. These claims refutes the reading passage’s explanation that gasification of the coal would make no harmful effects on the environment. On top of that, the speaker asserts that static electricity is also not a better way. The reason is that this technology only gathers soot and ash, not carbon dioxide which is the worst chemical on the environment. Therefore, the effect of static electricity on the environmental phenomenon like global warming would be minor. This assertions cast doubt on the reading passage’s insistence that static electricity would be effective to preserve the environment. Finally, the professor argues that fabric filters would not be an effective option replacing the coal’s traditional usage. This is due to the fact that this technology requires lots of maintenance. To be specific, it has short lives, so if we use it, we would have to replace it frequently. Therefore, it is not cost effective. Furthermore, fans used in this technology require a lot of energy, so they decreased the overall efficiency of this method. These arguments counter the reading passage’s opinion that fabric filters is a highly effective technique in terms of using coal. |