▶ Your Answer :
In this given set of information, there is
some discrepancy between the views of the lecturer and the author on the issue
of wave farms. The lecturer affirms that indeed, wave facilities possess many
shortcomings, whereas the author suggests otherwise.
To
begin with, the lecturer debunks the author’s first conjecture. To elaborate in
detail, the lecturer states that wave farms are not dependable and persistent
generators of power. This is because of disruptions and break-downs caused by
technical problems that fluctuate power generation of wave farms. This casts
doubt on the reading passage’s assertion that wave farms are definitely
reliable power generators with predictable uses of waves.
Secondly,
the speaker also indicates dissent over the reading passage’s idea on
eco-friendliness of wave farms. The lecturer sounds convinced that the author
is making a manifest error since floating convertors virtually contain toxic
substances which can have adverse effects on the marine environment. However,
the author clarifies that wave farms are truly environmentally-friendly
facilities without burning harmful fuels, thus triggering neither pollution nor
contamination.
Third,
the lecture goes on to expound that the author’s final point on impact of wave
farms regarding the surrounding landscape is flawed. To corroborate this
opinion, the lecturer mentions that convertors do have negative effects on the
natural beauty of the near landscape since they are usually painted in bright
colors and set close to shores, which make them easily noticeable. This
counters the author’s argument that wave farms do not damage the natural beauty
of the peripheral landscape. With three convincing ideas that the lecturer
posits, the assumptions made by the reading passage are all rendered
groundless.
|