In the lecture, the speaker contends that methods suggested in reading passage would not be worked. (Clearly explain the topic) This casts doubt on the reading’s point that carbon sequestration can be accomplished in a number of ways.
To begin with, the lecturer asserts that increasing the number of phytoplankton would not permanently proceed. This is because that massively multiplied phytoplankton runs out of nitrogen which is needed to survive, so the population could be decreased again. (What does it mean?) In addition, according to a recent survey, the quantity of CO2 which was stored by adding a lot of iron to the ocean would be infinitesimal relatively. This is contradictory to the reading passage’s claim that people should increase the amount of phytoplankton by adding iron to the ocean. This is because phytoplankton can absorb carbo hydrate and they sink into the bottom of the ocean when they die.
On top of that, the speaker maintains that creating artificial wetlands to sequester CO2 is ineffective. This is because since artificial wetlands could not contain CO2 as much as natural wetlands do. Moreover, according to the study, it takes too long time for artificial wetlands to develop fully. This view is in direct opposition to the reading’s assertion that making artificial wetlands is another excellent way.
Lastly, the lecturer points out that storing CO2 in abandoned coal mines is problematic. When CO2 bonds together with coal, the process creates lots of methane and the methane contains a lot of co2. As a result, when they burn, the stored gas would leak into the atmosphere and all of CO2 would not adhere to the coal. This refutes the reading’s insistence that the greenhouse gas can be stored in abandoned coal mines.
|
채점기준표 | Grammar | Contents | Example | Coherence |
점수 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Score | Limited 10-15 | - 아이디어들은 많이 제시되어 있으나, 예시와 문장들이 매끄럽게 연결되어 있지 않고, 무엇이 무엇을 support하고 있는지 파악하기 어렵습니다. - this is since, because s+v, be decrease등 잘못된 어법사용에 유의하여 주세요.
|