▶ Your Answer :
In the lecture, the speaker contends that the claim suggested in the reading passage is groundless. Therefore, he casts doubt on the reading's point that adding bacteria to oil-clogged waters is not a practical method to tackle oil spills.
To begin with, the lecturer asserts that the bacteria can quickly consume the oil. He points out that certain chemicals can break down the oil into small pieces, which help the bacteria easily eat them. In addition, these chemicals can improve the growth of the bacteria, ultimately accelerating the break down of the oil. This is in direct opposition to the reading's argument that the bacteria takes a long time to completely consume the oil.
On top of that, the speaker argues that the algae blooms are unlikey to happen. To be more specific, when people carefully control the amount of fertilizers that enable the bacteria to work correctly, they can prevent the occurrence of the algae blooms. Also, the lecturer conjures upon the example that algae blooms did not occur although people utilized the fertilizers. This is contradictory to the reading passage's assertion that the fertilizers may cause the algae blooms.
Lastly, the lecturer maintains that using the bacteria is the only solution to deal with the oil spills in deep ocean. He supports his idea by saying that there are no other ways to handle the oil spills in the deep water. He says that the bacteria eventually tackle the oil spills although the bacteria slowly eat the oil far below the water. This rebuffs the reading's insistence that the bacteria cannot function properly in the deep water
|