In “Energy
Saving Secret of Jellyfish” by James Gorman. The moon jelly or also known as
the common jellyfish have been clogging up the Swedish nuclear power plant for
more than a month now. In South Korea they have invented a robotic blender to liquefy
the jellyfish. They have been known to be 2 inches to even 15 inches long. Brad
J. Gemmell, a scientist along with the US Navy, are trying to figure out how to use their energy.
It would
be helpful for the Navy to figure this out for ocean vessels that need to,
maintain a certain position or move at a slower pace. Their energy has been
useful for them throughout a long time and they have survived like this long
period of time ago.
One way
this author has done well and bad, was how it all flows together and you
understand what the author is trying to explain. Something he does wrong is that he doesn’t explain
that many examples from where or what has cause the Navy to develop this theory.
And also how they want to experiment on Jellyfish.
If this review has anything going for it, it’s that fact that it’s short, sweet, and to the point. I also liked how Pablo was able to give a way that this new energy could be used to benefit man kind in his navy example. It would be very useful for ship to be able to create energy from jellyfish during long journeys because then ships could save stored energy when in areas that have large quantities of jellyfish. With less energy needed for, let’s say, big cruise ship to get from California up to Alaska, Tickets would cost less and the cruise ship companies would make more money from the reduced cost per voyage. Finally Pablo does another good job in pointing out something that I think most readers would like to know, why don’t we do this and why aren’t we researching this?
ReplyDeletePablo’s article covered the basics, but it really needed more to it. The review didn’t contain much information and the information it did give was just blocks of facts, thrown together in very little order. Also, Pablo’s review could have used more of a flow to it. Unlike the article itself, Pablo’s review was very choppy and hard to follow. The review could use more of a body because at this point it really has nothing to it.
Before now I had never thought about using jellyfish for energy, but one thing about this article that surprised me was that the navy had done research into the idea but had decided not to use it. Also, why isn’t there a reason for they decided not to use it? But have left me curious to find out more.
Pablo’s review talks about a problem happening in Sweden with jellyfish clogging up Sweden’s nuclear power plant. His review is short and cuts right to the chase there is no nonsense information. He also does a nice job including the title of the article and the author, personally I like to know what I am reading and who it is written by. I like it how Pablo included that these jellyfish can be from two to fifteen inches long, that is the kind of detail one should have in their article review.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading this review the writing was really awkward and at some points didn’t make sense. Yes, in a review you need to include facts but you also should include some personality in your writing, he rarely did. He included very little detail, which made me feel like I was just reading notes, not a review. His writing needs to have a flow that way it would be easier to understand.
From this article I learned that jellyfish are really not that bad. They really could help contribute to mankind for the better. They can be used for energy which I think is fascinating to think about. Even though the navy is not using this new source of energy it is still cool to think that something the navy studied could be swimming with you in the ocean. Pablo’s review left me wondering, what is the problem with using jellyfish as a source of energy?
I think that Pablo did a very good job in reviewing this article. One thing that I liked about it was how he included the article title and the author of the article in the first paragraph as a reference for the reader. I also liked how he included things that certain people are doing about this issue. A third thing that Pablo did well in this review was explain the ways that the article was good and bad.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that could have been better about this review would have been if he included just a little more about the article and the topic of the article itself. Another thing that could have been better is if he fixed the very few grammatical errors in the review.
One thing that impressed me was that somehow jellyfish got into Swedish nuclear power plants and that they have been there for over a month.
I think Pablo did a really nice job on his review. One thing I liked about it was how he explained it and got right to the point about what his article was about. I also like how he used various details to back it up. I also really like how Pablo gave his reasons why the article was good and bad, and I also enjoy how Pablo described the different things people being discovered about the Jelly fish.
ReplyDeleteone thing I believe Pablo could have improved on is that I think Pablo should have added more detailed and explained more thoroughly about what cases the build up of jelly fish, what is going to be done, and how it will help the environment.
on thing I liked about Pablo's review was that, although it was very short in length, I like how Pablo got straight to the point and gave a brief summary about his article.
In the review of the article Energy Saving Secret of Jellyfish by Pablo Rivera, he talks about a problem in Sweden. They are wasting the energy of jellyfish that are clogging up a nuclear plant, and want to find efficient ways to collect this energy. He explains the article in a very concise manner, and it makes it very easy for the reader to pay attention to it. Pablo also includes many interesting facts about the Jellyfish, and research on this topic. He also does a good job at critiquing the author, and has many good points.
ReplyDeletePablo’s review was a little too short, and it didn’t have as much information as it should have. We needed more description of how the jellyfish clog nuclear power plants, and he didn’t describe how much energy jellyfish could produce, and where it would be used. He also seemed to jump from one topic to another and it became very confusing for me. I think that this review could have been much better if it had better transitions and a little more explanation of everything.
One thing that I learned from this article is that jellyfish can be up to 15 inches long, and that they are also called moon jellys. I have never heard of this problem before and found it very interesting. I want to know more.
Pablo’s review was on jellyfish in Sweden and its possible use for energy. I like that Pablo made this article short and simple, getting right to the point and making things clear. I also liked how he included the benefits of these jellyfish in the Navy, and ways they could be used for energy. I also liked how he went into detail about the use of this energy during a longer journey, and with this newfound energy the sips could maintain a certain position or move at a slower pace as needed. Finally, I liked the detail that Pablo had in the length of the jellyfish that varied from 2 to 15 inches. This was a detail that added to the article and was much needed.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that could have been made better in this review was a lot more detail that could help fill in the story a little more, and could have made the paragraphs flow more. For example, Pablo could have included more details on the use of the jellyfish as energy and how the Swedish nuclear plants are planning to move the jellyfish to continue their operations. Also, I think that Pablo could have added more information to the article, because the lack of detail and information left the reader asking questions about the content.
This is the first time I have heard about this problem with the jellyfish, and it was interesting to learn about how to use this problem to create something good, like energy for naval ships. I thought this was cool to learn about and I look forward to hearing more about it in the future.
I liked reading Pablo’s article because it really summed up a topic without dragging on for too long of a time. This is important in keeping the reader’s attention. I liked that Pablo gave some background on information on the actual jellyfish that is being studied. This showed that he knew what he was talking about! A third thing that I liked was how Pablo gave a connection to the world and how this jellyfish might benefit our Navy.
ReplyDeleteSomething that Pablo could have done better is that he could have added a little more information on things that the energy from the jellyfish could be used for and also maybe some information on the energy that the Navy is using now. I would have liked to know how exactly the jellyfish can be used for energy. Another thing that I think Pablo could have worked on was that some of the sentences had random commas and period in them, which made the review a little difficult to read.
I was very intrigued when I saw the title of this review; I never knew that jellyfish could be used for energy! Pablo’s article makes me want to learn more about the topic, which impressed me.
Pablo choose an interesting article, and it was very different from the rest that i have read, his article was unique and even though it was short it gave some detail and he went right to the point. I also like how he talk about what the navy can do to help this situation. I briefly looked at the article and the statement he made about the statement were accurate and i like his criticism towards the article and how he points out what is important and what could be changed.
ReplyDeleteI feel Pablo could have maybe added some more detail and talked more about the article and explaining it. He also could have given us some background information so we had more of an understanding, but apart from that, it was a well written review about the article he chose.
I wasn't aware about any of this before i read this review and it was very interesting to read about, and i'm glad i read Pablo's review because now i have an idea what its about.
This review interested me because there is not much talk about Jellyfish, and to learn about Jellyfish being "liquified" is disheartening. It is amazing how much distraction humans create for there own personal needs. The review was to the point, and easy to read. What could have made this review better would have been explaining what the Navy has to do with Jellyfish clogging up the Swedish power plant, and why they plan to experiment on Jellyfish. What impressed me was the amount of trouble the jellyfish are causing in Sweden.
ReplyDeletePablo did a great job of reviewing this article. The article he chose was interesting and shed light on the new research being conducted on the Moon Jellyfish in regards to how it moves. Pablo's review was concise and to the point which made it very easy to read and understand. The statements he made were accurate and it was important that he include them in his review.
ReplyDeletePablo could have definitely developed his ideas more and given a bitt more background information. His review also contained a couple grammatical mistakes and the review would have flowed better if they were corrected.
I was not aware of this new research being conducted on the moon Jellyfish and I am glad it is happening, it is a good idea for humans to gain information from ideas they see in nature.
I think that Pablo did a good job reviewing this article. I like how he made his article short and straight to the point. Another thing that Pablo did well is that he chose an article that really grabbed by attention even when I just read the title because I believe that jellyfish are very interesting and there is much to learn about them. Finally, I liked how he gave a good critique on his article, explaining why he thought the things he thought.
ReplyDeleteOne thing that Pablo did not do well is that there many grammar mistakes in his article that made his article review hard to understand. Another thing that Pablo did not do well is that he could have expressed his ideas better, making them easier to understand.
Overall, I think Pablo did a very good job at choosing ideas and an article that would grab his peers attentions, but in his review he had several grammar mistakes that made it harder for him to express his good ideas.