▶ Your Answer : The reading passage and the lecture are both about wave farms as one of the alternative energy. The author of the reading believes that wave-energy facilities are seem to be a great deal of alternative energy. On the other hand, the lecturer opposes the specific points made in the reading. First of all, the author claims that wave farms are such a reliable generators of power. He believes as waves are constants and predictable, it is possible to accurately predict the generation capacity of a wave-power facility. The lecturer challenges this point by saying wave-energy is a dependable energy. Furthermore, he points out new technology could damage harshly on environment which will cause a wave-power facility fluctuate widely. Secondly, the author states that wave-energy facilities are environmentally friendly. He argues the floating convertors use the movement of the waves to turn their turbines, so they never contain any harmful fuels that can leak into the water. The lecturer rebuts this argument by saying wave farms can cause pollutants which is harmful and toxic if it leak into the ocean. Lastly, the author mentions that wave farms won’t impact negatively on the natural beauty of the surrounding landscape. He notes that wave-power convertors are small and float on or just below the surface of the water, therefore they won’t be noticeable. The lecturer, on the other hand, casts doubt on the idea in the reading passage by saying that wave farms would have been spotted by tourist easily to make them detectable, as a result, wave farms will affect negatively on scenary. While both the reading passage and the lecturer deal with wave farms as an alternative energy, the lecturer effectively opposes all of the specific points presented in the reading. |