Fabian Kerj
10/19/14
Current event
By Fabian
University of Maryland Center for
Environmental Science. "Impact of offshore wind farms on marine
species." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 16 October 2014.
<www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/10/141016123608.htm>.
Review
This article is about the impact of ocean wind turbines
on marine animals. It talks about how the construction of these turbines can
cause confusion and even danger for the marine life around its construction. In
the article the author also tells us how the wind turbine can provide benefits
for the marine life around its location such as a safe water with increased
food supply. The turbine is told as a both beneficial device and a technology
that can be bad for nature. It gives ecological energy to the growing concern
about pollution that many energy sources makes in this present day. The
turbines are placed in the ocean and uses wind to spin a turbine and therefore
create electricity. The article ends with a conclusion about the up and down
sides of the wind turbine
Many people today only see the way of harvesting natural
energy in good ways though almost everyone is not aware of the side effects it
can do such as the effect on marine life when wind turbines are installed. This
problem has to be overviewed by the people and not just think of natural energy
sources as a good thing but also the bad things that it can do. Maybe soon this problem will not only be a
threat to the animal kingdom, but the humans as well.
I thought the author did a great job when it came to
discussing and explaining the problem and less about things such as background
info and history about windmills effect on marine life. What I would change or
do if I was to make an article like this would be to include important
information such as statistics, numbers and other numerical or mathematical information.
The statistics that were missing from this article would have made it more
interesting to read and also a better understanding of the problem.
After reading this article there are good aspects an things you need to work on. First, The structure of your article was nicely laid out. The three distinct paragraphs made it easy to follow. Also, you provided a nice amount of background information which helped me understand the point of your article. Lastly, your last paragraph included a well written critique of the author.
ReplyDeleteYou could have improved your grammar in this article. You were missing periods and some sentences didn't make sense. Secondly, the article lacked depth in your topic. You provided the general information but you did not have the deep thought on your topic.
This article taught me the affect that wind turbines has on the marine life surrounding it. I did not know that the turbine contributes to the pollution crises.
The analysis by Fabian Kerj of the article “Impact of offshore wind farms on marine species” was well developed. However, I felt that it was missing a few key details.
ReplyDeleteOne thing this student did well was his response; it was straightforward and tells the reader exactly what this article is talking about. Also, the main points and topics in the article are clearly stated and explained. For example, I know that the article explains benefits the wind turbine provides. As well as, his own person view of the topic is stated.
However, he lacks proper topic sentences and provides no build up before providing facts from the article. In addition, no direct quotes were shared from the article. Over all, I learned a lot from his work, including that wind turbines could provide safe water containing more food supply.
In Fabian’s review of “Impact of Offshore Wind Farms on Marine Species,” he briefly summarized the main idea of the article. I viewed this as both good and bad. It was good in the sense that it gives the reader a very easy, quick overview of the article. On the other hand, the briefness left me with many questions. For example, he stated the ocean wind turbines endangered the marine species, but how or why? By answering simple questions like these, Fabian’s review would have left the reader with a much better understanding of the topic. Another edit Fabian could have made is adding his opinions on the topic. This would have helped the review be more relatable for a student to read. Although some key components of the review were missing, Fabian did a nice job of explaining why this problem of the ocean wind turbines matter. He states many people are unaware of the effects on marine life and how marine species are suffering because of this ignorance. I also thought Fabian’s critique of the article was well thought out and included many suggestions, like adding statistics. After reading this review, I have learned how the turbine can be beneficial and dangerous to the environment. Before reading this review, I had no knowledge on ocean wind turbines, but now I have a brief understanding and hope the marine life will not have to suffer for much longer by creating a solution to the dangers of the turbines.
ReplyDeleteI reviewed the article Fabian read. In the article Fabian discussed the impact of ocean turbines on marine animals. In the article Fabian did a good job of making it clear that there are many good and harmful things the turbines can do. For example the turbines reduce pollution in the air. Fabian did do a good job of writing a helpful critique. Finally, he did a good job of making his review flow well. To improve the article Fabian could have provided more information and stats on what is actual happening to the animals. As an example he could have said that whales are most affected. Also, he could have analyzed the effect on the humans in more detail. What was really interesting to me was that the turbines can cause harm to the animals even when the actual turbine is in the air and the support is under water. They seem as if they would not cause harm.
ReplyDeleteNanda Fraser
ReplyDeleteI read Fabian’s article review for my current events. His article review was about how wind turbines could impact animal habitats. I thought that his article review was very well separated, and this made is easier to read and understand. I also liked Fabian’s review because it was about a topic that I found interesting. I had never heard about this topic, so it was one that I wanted to learn about. I enjoyed that his article review because it was very to the point, and this made it quick and easy to read.
Although I enjoyed many aspects of his article, there were two aspects that I think needed work. One aspect was that his grammar usage needed work. Some of his commas and periods were in incorrect places, and made the review difficult to read at times. Also, there were many run on sentences that needed to be corrected. These two things made the article review somewhat difficult to comprehend.
Although there were a few things that should be corrected, I think that something that stood out to me directly is the fact that his article was one that could be debated. I liked how he provided the facts behind the two different ideas, and I think this made the review very interesting.