The transition in the essay is smooth. There are a abundance of facts which very strongly support the advantages of VHTR.
However,the thesis statement is not very clear. The body paragraph mentions about the advantages of VHTR which the thesis statement fail to highlight.
There is no comparison with the other reactors. The essay seems biased because it only focus on VHTR as the reactor that the author take side on.
Only paragraph 3 has a warrant. The subsequent paragraph does not explain how it supports your thesis. Hence, it might result in the reader drawing different conclusion compared to what you want to present.
There is also a lack of counterclaim and rebuttal which makes the argument look less credible.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Blog entry on Reflection on Group Activity
My group played the role of manufacturer on the class debate on Wednesday.
Our claim towards the topic is to ask government to subsidize the high cost of waste management. Our argument focus primarily on the economic issue of manufacturing and is directed towards the government requesting them to provide funding and assistance for our research and development sector.
The strength we had in our arguement, is that we are concise in our presentation. We are able to bring our argument clearly toward the audience.
However,the weaknesses we had in our argument is that no evidence or statistics are present to further support our stand. Also, we are unable to foresee all incoming counter claim and rebuttal from our opposing teams, namely the government and the environmentalist.
I believe to bring about a better argument, my group will have to find evidence and statistics to support our data. Not only so, we have to brainstorm and research on more area of discussion and not just limit ourselves to the economic issues. Last but not least, we must on the other side reason more in order to achieve a balance in our argument.
Our claim towards the topic is to ask government to subsidize the high cost of waste management. Our argument focus primarily on the economic issue of manufacturing and is directed towards the government requesting them to provide funding and assistance for our research and development sector.
The strength we had in our arguement, is that we are concise in our presentation. We are able to bring our argument clearly toward the audience.
However,the weaknesses we had in our argument is that no evidence or statistics are present to further support our stand. Also, we are unable to foresee all incoming counter claim and rebuttal from our opposing teams, namely the government and the environmentalist.
I believe to bring about a better argument, my group will have to find evidence and statistics to support our data. Not only so, we have to brainstorm and research on more area of discussion and not just limit ourselves to the economic issues. Last but not least, we must on the other side reason more in order to achieve a balance in our argument.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Blog Entry No.2 - Peer Review: Effendi WA1
Effendi's draft is coherent to the question and does not beat around the bush. His essay is well-supported, with references to a few other articles. The essay started off well with a good introduction that is clear cut and answers the question and ends off with a short and consistent conclusion.
The first argument about "nature [having] the ability to save lives and sustain livelihood" is well organised with each idea in one paragraph. The argument is well presented with many ideas branching from the main argument. However some points are not supported by references and appears to be touch-and-go points without much elaboration (example, paragraph 4). The flow of the argument is smooth between paragraphs as they are clear cut and unconfusing.
The second argument about "nature’s ability to help human race in the future to fight climate change" had one idea which was well supported and elaborated. The transition within the paragraph is smooth. However a flaw about the second argument is that it only had one idea which is the maintaining of the ecosystem via replanting trees. Another idea brought up in the reading was about the potential learning opportunities we have from nature that can combat the climate change. This idea was not in Effendi's draft possibly due to the word limit.
Overall, I feel that Effendi's draft was a well-written essay, but some improvements can be done to the body paragraphs.
The first argument about "nature [having] the ability to save lives and sustain livelihood" is well organised with each idea in one paragraph. The argument is well presented with many ideas branching from the main argument. However some points are not supported by references and appears to be touch-and-go points without much elaboration (example, paragraph 4). The flow of the argument is smooth between paragraphs as they are clear cut and unconfusing.
The second argument about "nature’s ability to help human race in the future to fight climate change" had one idea which was well supported and elaborated. The transition within the paragraph is smooth. However a flaw about the second argument is that it only had one idea which is the maintaining of the ecosystem via replanting trees. Another idea brought up in the reading was about the potential learning opportunities we have from nature that can combat the climate change. This idea was not in Effendi's draft possibly due to the word limit.
Overall, I feel that Effendi's draft was a well-written essay, but some improvements can be done to the body paragraphs.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Blog Entry No. 1 - Summary of Speech Given by Dr. Liong Shie Yui
Dr. Liong talks about climate change and ways to predict these changes through studying climate models.
In the first part of the presentation, he started off by defining climate and showing a trend of temperature throughout several months. He also stressed that climate change is not the same as weather change which is highly predictable. Basically, climate is an average calculation of rainfall and temperature over a long period of time. Extensive research has shown that the temperature of the Earth has shown a drastic increase in the last 100 years especially most significant at both the North and South Poles. This is invariably caused by the increase in greenhouse gas emissions due to human activity.
Greenhouse gases prevent the reradiated heat from the sun from escaping into space. This is called the greenhouse effect. Dr. Liong used an analogy of an umbrella referring to the stratosphere, where this “big umbrella” traps the greenhouse gases. Although this is a good process which keeps the Earth warm, too much of these gases are causing global warming. The largest greenhouse gas emission is no doubt carbon dioxide (CO2) which is produced when we burn fossil fuels for energy and through deforestation (i.e. forest fires). Other gases like methane, nitrous oxide and fluorinated gases although are emitted in less amounts, are much more potent than CO2 at causing greenhouse effects. It is thus important that we not overlook these gases when analysing the factors that causes climate change. There is no doubt that the global warming is caused by human activity and not natural forces as there has been no record of drastic temperature increase since the start of Earth’s history till the 1900s which is when humans began the Industrial Revolution.
In the second part of Dr. Liong’s presentation, he introduced to us the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its efforts to estimate the changes in the climate and thus formulate ways to pre-empt or minimise damages. In his presentation, Dr. Liong showed us a picture from the 2007 IPCC report, AR4, with two different emission scenarios of how the future climate would look like with variable energy sources. Scenario B1 which was the most ideal scenario was emphasized by him to be unlikely. The report also shows that rise in sea levels and temperatures of the Earth are expected even after the stabilization of CO2 levels. To estimate changes in the climate more specifically to each region, the IPCC uses Global Climate Models (GCMs) which divides the Earth up into square grids. However, the GCMs are just a prediction and models of the same region can differ. In the case where contrasting climate models are presented, the majority result is deemed more accurate.
For small countries like Singapore, a GCM model would be too big for it to make sense of the results. Thus Regional Climate Models (RCMs) are used instead, which divides the bigger grid squares of the GCM into smaller ones. This downscaling of climatic values allows more specific climate changes to the area with regards to the terrain and proximity to coastal areas. It is then clearer for the analyzers to see which parts of the country would have more changes in temperature or precipitation. However it is also not viable to only look at the area in the RCM to estimate the climate change as many factors influencing the climate of the area is of another region. An example given by Dr. Liong is the wind that blows from Vietnam that results in increase in sea level and precipitation in Singapore. Thus we must also include the regional climate factors in our analysis of the climate in the particular area. Dr. Liong also mentions of how the climate models are difficult to analyze and make sense of. It is thus necessary to look at the bigger picture of the climate model, whether it has a net increase or decrease in temperature or the intensity of the net increase in temperature.
In conclusion, although the future prospects of the climate is not ideal, the GCM and RCM can be used by the country for hydrological impact studies which is then used to formulate ways to mitigate climate change. Climate models are thus very important for the government with regards to formulating policies regarding the environment and land use planning.
In the first part of the presentation, he started off by defining climate and showing a trend of temperature throughout several months. He also stressed that climate change is not the same as weather change which is highly predictable. Basically, climate is an average calculation of rainfall and temperature over a long period of time. Extensive research has shown that the temperature of the Earth has shown a drastic increase in the last 100 years especially most significant at both the North and South Poles. This is invariably caused by the increase in greenhouse gas emissions due to human activity.
Greenhouse gases prevent the reradiated heat from the sun from escaping into space. This is called the greenhouse effect. Dr. Liong used an analogy of an umbrella referring to the stratosphere, where this “big umbrella” traps the greenhouse gases. Although this is a good process which keeps the Earth warm, too much of these gases are causing global warming. The largest greenhouse gas emission is no doubt carbon dioxide (CO2) which is produced when we burn fossil fuels for energy and through deforestation (i.e. forest fires). Other gases like methane, nitrous oxide and fluorinated gases although are emitted in less amounts, are much more potent than CO2 at causing greenhouse effects. It is thus important that we not overlook these gases when analysing the factors that causes climate change. There is no doubt that the global warming is caused by human activity and not natural forces as there has been no record of drastic temperature increase since the start of Earth’s history till the 1900s which is when humans began the Industrial Revolution.
In the second part of Dr. Liong’s presentation, he introduced to us the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and its efforts to estimate the changes in the climate and thus formulate ways to pre-empt or minimise damages. In his presentation, Dr. Liong showed us a picture from the 2007 IPCC report, AR4, with two different emission scenarios of how the future climate would look like with variable energy sources. Scenario B1 which was the most ideal scenario was emphasized by him to be unlikely. The report also shows that rise in sea levels and temperatures of the Earth are expected even after the stabilization of CO2 levels. To estimate changes in the climate more specifically to each region, the IPCC uses Global Climate Models (GCMs) which divides the Earth up into square grids. However, the GCMs are just a prediction and models of the same region can differ. In the case where contrasting climate models are presented, the majority result is deemed more accurate.
For small countries like Singapore, a GCM model would be too big for it to make sense of the results. Thus Regional Climate Models (RCMs) are used instead, which divides the bigger grid squares of the GCM into smaller ones. This downscaling of climatic values allows more specific climate changes to the area with regards to the terrain and proximity to coastal areas. It is then clearer for the analyzers to see which parts of the country would have more changes in temperature or precipitation. However it is also not viable to only look at the area in the RCM to estimate the climate change as many factors influencing the climate of the area is of another region. An example given by Dr. Liong is the wind that blows from Vietnam that results in increase in sea level and precipitation in Singapore. Thus we must also include the regional climate factors in our analysis of the climate in the particular area. Dr. Liong also mentions of how the climate models are difficult to analyze and make sense of. It is thus necessary to look at the bigger picture of the climate model, whether it has a net increase or decrease in temperature or the intensity of the net increase in temperature.
In conclusion, although the future prospects of the climate is not ideal, the GCM and RCM can be used by the country for hydrological impact studies which is then used to formulate ways to mitigate climate change. Climate models are thus very important for the government with regards to formulating policies regarding the environment and land use planning.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Blog Entry No. 0 - INTRODUCTION
Hey everyone, welcome to my blog. I would not even bother to tell you guys my name or particulars because you will be able to find it somehow in this page. By saying this, you might think I am an arrogant person. Somehow I have successful make a first impression. BUT please, I am not of some sort of person whom you think I am. It is very interesting to learn how the mind of human beings works.
I shall start the introduction proper, my name is Yuheng, and I am a first year Environmental Engineering student. My hobby is playing computer games, mahjong and sports, which includes badminton and table tennis. I also enjoy learning new skills and knowledge. I strongly believe that nothing is impossible to conquer in this world; it will just take a great deal of effort and time.
Likewise, I also believe that mastering English is not difficult, it is just that I never really put in a lot of effort in it. English has always been an academic barrier for me, affecting my grades. My biggest problem would be my weakness in grammar and expression. What I would want to take away from this course would be brushing up on my weakness.
That will be all for the time being, will continue to update once I can think of anything to put down here.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
.jpg)