In the
lecture, the lecturer casts doubt on whether the green roofs are actually
advantageous as mentioned in the reading passage. The lecturer strongly
disagrees with the idea of beneficial green roofs, regarding it as an ephemeral
trend of which the good side is overly exaggerated.
First
and foremost, the lecturer suggests that installing green roofs do not help
solve the problem of shortage of parks. He clearly makes his point saying not
everyone has a fair access to the parks located on rooftop areas of large
buildings. He claims that those who can actually benefit from rooftop parks are
strictly limited to people who have access to the building. This poses crucial
criticism on the reading passage, which asserts that city residents can enjoy
rooftop parks.
Moreover, the lecturer also emphasizes that green roofs do not provide
an attractive views of the city. This is because most people walks on the
street and rarely get opportunities to see roofs. Therefore, he goes against
the reading passage’s idea that green roofs offer an aesthetically pleasing
appearance of a city.
Lastly,
although the reading passage claims that green roofs are energy-efficient, the
lecturer firmly dissent from this opinion, providing an evidence that the extra
cost of installing and maintaining green roofs offsets the energy saved. Hence,
although green roofs might function as an “insulating blanket”, the lecturer
has no doubts that it will cause a headache to people who have to deal with the
outrageous cost of maintenance of the extravagant blanket.
|