▶ Your Answer :
According to the reading, the use of bacteria as a method to break up oil spills is not practical. However, the lecturer argues that it is feasible.
First, the reading says that it takes a lot of time to get rid of oil in this way. Bacteria will breaks down oil bit by bit, it is much slower than any other methods. So the oil will cause more harm to the ocean as they remains longer at the sea and spreads out. On the other hand, the lecturer contends that this is not a serious problem. To be specific, the bacteria will split oil into small pieces and hasten the break-down process. Thus, the more the bacteria, the faster it will break up oil.
Next, the reading claims that the bacteria can results in algae blooms. Fertilizer is needed for the bacteria's survival and it will cause algae blooms, which exploit the oxygen in the ocean. This can be fatal to other marine organisms. In contrast, the lecturer asserts that this is not a huge concern either. This is because fertilizer can be managed properly. If people use adequate amount of it, it will not cause harm to the ocean. What's more, there is a real example that indicates the fertilizer does not make the algae blooms to occur while the bacteria is cleaning the oil.
Finally, this kind of bacteria does not work efficiently in deep water according to the reading. Because the water temperature in deep sea is extremely low and this negatively affects on their growth. Therefore, if oil spills happen in the deep ocean, this manner will not work well. While the lecturer casts doubt on this claim, suggesting that there are no waves in deep levels of the ocean to eliminate oil. Hence, the bacteria is the merely way to remove it.
점수: 27 지적할 부분이 없는 통합형 에세이입니다. 통합형 에세이에서 가장 중요한 부분을 차지하는 것 중에 하나는 한 주제에 대하여서 서로 다른 정보를 가지고 있는 리딩과 리스닝이 어떻게 비교하고 반박을 하는 것인지를 보는 것 입니다. 지금 이 에세이 같은 경우는 리딩이나 리스닝 둘 다 충분하게 잘 설명하고 있는 거 같습니다. 각 단락들에서 리딩과 리스닝이 자기가 무엇을 말하려고 하는 것인지 파악하기가 쉬워서 그런지 주제에 대하여서 서로 어떤 생각을 갖고 있는 지를 잘 파악할 수 있었던 에세이였습니다. 수고많으셨습니다. |