▶ Your Answer :
In the reading passage, there is ample support for the author’s claim that there are ways to accomplish carbon sequestration which is storing CO2 in to the ground and ocean. However, the professor in the lecture gives several reasons as a rebuttal to the author’s point. First, the professor contends that increasing the amount of phytoplankton by adding the supplying iron to the ocean dose not work. Because phytoplankton’s population are decreasing, CO2 stored in the ocean is the small size. Moreover, according to recent study, stocked CO2 is only 3% of all amount. this cast doubt on the reading passage’s claim that elevating the number of phytoplankton can be a good way to sequestrate CO2. Next, the professor insists that making the wetland is uneffective. a wetland makes oxygen but, it is artificial oxygen(?) and artificial wetland occurs 23% less than natural things. on top of that constructing artificial wetland takes more than about 100years. This means that It is too late for ecosystem to fully function. This counters the reading passage’s assertion that covering artificial wetland on water is another way to achieve carbon sequestration. Finally, the professor argues that cole mine cannot be a good way to sequestrate carbon. When carbon is pumped into old coal mine, they release methane which is common fossil fuel and contain CO2. Moreover, there is a chance to leak out to atmosphere. Consequently, this method might not be reduced CO2 at all. This refutes the reading passage’s suggestion that diminishing CO2 by combine CO2 molecule with coal is efficient way to reduce CO2.
첨삭부탁드립니다....ㅠㅠㅠㅠㅠㅠㅠㅠㅠ
|