▶ Your Answer :
In the reading passage, there is ample support for the author’s claim that there are some ways to carry out carbon sequestration to hold CO2 in the ground and oceans. However, the professor in the lecture gives several reasons as a rebuttal to the author’s point.
First, the professor contends that putting iron into the oceans is not persistent way to keep CO2. It is because when phytoplankton produce 무엇을 produce하는지가 밝혀져야 하는 문장입니다. phytoplankton이 빠르게 '증가한다'라는 의미라면 자동사로 쓰일 수 있는 increase, reproduce 등을 사용하는 것이 적합합니다. 지문 내용을 몰라서 정확히 수정하지 못했으니 맥락에 맞게 produce의 목적어를 넣거나 자동사로 고쳐주세요. rapidly due to additional supply of iron, they ended up consuming all of nitrogen, which results in decrease in the population back. Moreover, the study shows that through this way, only 3% of CO2 could be absorbed. It indicates that it is not that effective. lecture 내용을 더 간단하게 줄여주세요. This casts doubt on the reading passage’s suggestion sugge1stion that by helping phytoplankton propagate, a large amount of CO2 could be stored in them1 with the fact that the as plankton need CO2 when they photosynthesize.
Second, the professor argues that it is true for wetlands to contain CO2 a lot, but artificial wetlands are not effective since it takes such a long time to make them and they are have less capacity capable than natural ones. This refutes the reading passage’s assertion that building more artificial wetlands is the way to retain CO2.
Finally, the professor insists that it is not plausible that using old coal mines is a good way to maintain CO2 in them. The professor says that methane is released when CO2 bonds with deserted coalmines and methane serves as a fuel. The bottom line is that it emits they emit CO2 again 1when it burns. they burn. In short, the total amount of CO2 doesn’t change. This counters the reading passage’s idea that CO2 can be is captured on to the surface of old coalmines.
Comment : phytoplankton, wetlands, coalmine이라는 대립포인트가 각 본론에서 잘 드러나는 점이 좋습니다. 다만 아직 lecture주장에서 불필요하게 들어간 내용이나 정리가 명확하지 않은 부분들이 있어서 아쉬워요. 내용을 paraphrasing할 때 꼭 필요하지 않은 요소는 빼고, 맥락을 잘 살릴 수 있게 표현을 다듬어주시면 좋을 것 같아요. 실제 지문과 비교하면서 잘못 정리된 내용이나 필요한데 빠진 내용, 혹은 불필요한데 들어간 내용 등을 한 번 더 검토해주세요. 수일치 관련한 문법오류가 좀 있는 편이니 이 부분도 유의해주세요~ 수고 많으셨습니다~!
Integrated Writing Rubrics Score 3.5/5 A response at this level contains some important information from the lecture and conveys some relevant connection to the reading, but it is marked by one or more of the following : - Although the overall response is definitely oriented to the task, it conveys only vague, global, unclear, or somewhat imprecise connection of the points made in the lecture to points made in the reading. - The response may omit one major key point made in the lecture. - Some key points made in the lecture or the reading, or connections between the two, may be incomplete, inaccurate, or imprecise. - Errors of usage and/or grammar may be more frequent or may result in noticeably vague expressions or obscured meanings in conveying ideas and connections. |