▶ Your Answer :
In the reading passage, there is ample support for the
author’s claim that there is an effective way to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere,
CO2 carbon sequestration and it has a couple of ways to carry out. However, the
professor in the lecture gives several reasons as rebuttal to the author’s
point.
First, the professor contends that it is not permanent to
put iron into the oceans as a way to increase the number of phytoplankton. It
is because phytoplankton consumes Nitrogen and the population of phytoplankton
cannot grow that much. since there is a limited amount of it in the oceans.
Furthermore, a study has proved that a small amount of CO2 can be stored
through this way. This casts doubt on the reading passage’s idea that adding
more iron in the sea would be a good way to hold CO2 since phytoplankton, which
is capable of having CO2 in their bodies, can reproduce by getting iron.
Second, the professor insists that it is no use to build
more artificial wetlands because the capacity of artificial wetlands is 30%
less than natural ones. Moreover, it needs too much time for artificial
wetlands to be fully developed, which is around 100 years. This counters the
reading passage’s assertion that artificial wetlands can keep CO2 in them by
covering CO2 with water.
Finally, the professor argues that it is true that CO2 can
be attached to abandoned coal mines, but total amount of CO2 does not reduce at
all through this way. To be more specific, when abandoned coal mines capture
CO2, they release methane, which is fuel. What I mean is that it can produce
CO2 back when it burns. For this reason, abandoned coal mines are not useful.
This refutes the reading passage’s suggestion that abandoned coal can be used
to make CO2 remain in the surface of the coal for a long time.
23mins 315 words.
|