TPO 54 integrated writing

  • log
    University: UIBE
    Nationality: China
    September 23, 2021 at 5:31 am

    TPO 54 integrated writing

    The reading passage explores the issue of several ways to reduce the level of salt in the Salton Sea lake. The professor’s lecture deals with the same issue. However, she thinks that the three methods mentioned above are neither realistic nor practical, which contradicts what the reading states. And in the lecture, she uses three specific points to support her idea.

    First, even though the reading passage suggests that removing salt form the lake’s water could be achieved through distillation. the professor argues in the lecture that it would cause tremendous environmental problems. This is because the remainder of the distillation contains other noxious chemicals, which means people could breath in this poison with winds.

    Moreover, despite the statement in the reading that we can dilute the lake with ocean water, the professor contends that government do not have the necessary resources to build the pipelines needed to fetch the water in Pacific Ocean. Then she supports this point with the fact that the nearest ocean is 100 kilometer away. In other words, such a huge task won’t be practical.

    Finally, the professor asserts that dividing the late into several part make the lake susceptible to natural disasters whereas the author of the reading claims that it could control the lake’s salinity. The professor proves that this claim is indefensible by pointing out that mishaps such as earthquake could break the walls between those sections, i.e., the waters from different sections would mix back in the lake and make all the efforts end up in vein.

    In conclusion, the professor clearly identifies the weakness in the reading passage and convincingly shows that the central argument in the reading, that is, those methods to reduce salt level are just impractical and unrealistic.

    September 23, 2021 at 1:54 pm

    Feedback provided on your other essay

    log
    University: UIBE
    Nationality: China
    September 24, 2021 at 12:27 pm

    The reading passage explores the issue of several ways to reduce the level of salt in the Salton Sea lake. The professor’s lecture deals with the same problem. However, she thinks that the three methods mentioned above are neither realistic nor practical, which contradicts what the reading states. And in the lecture, she uses three specific points to support her idea.
    First, even though the reading passage suggests that removing salt from the lake’s water could be achieved through distillation. The professor argues in the lecture that it would cause tremendous environmental problems. This is because the remainder of the distillation contains other noxious chemicals, which means people could breathe in this poison with winds.

    Moreover, despite the statement in the reading that we can dilute the lake with ocean water, the professor contends that government does not have the necessary resources to build the pipelines needed to fetch the water in the Pacific Ocean. Then she supports this point with the fact that the nearest ocean is 100 kilometers away. In other words, such a huge task won’t be practical.
    Finally, the professor asserts that dividing the late into several parts makes the lake susceptible to natural disasters, whereas the author of the reading claims that it could control the lake’s salinity. The professor proves that the claim is indefensible by pointing out that mishaps such as earthquakes could break the walls between those sections, i.e., the waters from different areas would mix back in the lake and make all the efforts end up in vain.
    In conclusion, the professor clearly identifies the weakness in the reading passage and convincingly shows that the central argument in the reading, that is, those methods to reduce salt level, are just impractical and unrealistic.

    September 27, 2021 at 2:43 am

    Invalid [Please complete the revision of your first essay prior to submitting a new one.]