CW8-3923
From Environmental Technology
Jalcst-3923 (Talk | contribs) |
(graded) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{Graded}} | ||
| - | + | {{OK}} | |
| - | + | ||
1A - The issue is in how people plan ahead of time how they will set up their towns and cities to make them better in the future. Some of the problems are spending less time with family due to driving to and from work, pollution would also rise, and having to spend more money on gas. | 1A - The issue is in how people plan ahead of time how they will set up their towns and cities to make them better in the future. Some of the problems are spending less time with family due to driving to and from work, pollution would also rise, and having to spend more money on gas. | ||
| - | + | {{OK}} | |
1B - If it were my town I would try to make traffic easier to deal with, nobody likes to wait in traffic for ever. In a town like Carbondale jobs are limited, so I would also like to see more jobs come up. | 1B - If it were my town I would try to make traffic easier to deal with, nobody likes to wait in traffic for ever. In a town like Carbondale jobs are limited, so I would also like to see more jobs come up. | ||
| - | + | {{OK}} | |
2A - The benefits are that they are protecting endangered animals and plants in the area, some of which are only found in that part of the world. | 2A - The benefits are that they are protecting endangered animals and plants in the area, some of which are only found in that part of the world. | ||
| - | + | {{OK}} | |
2B - Some of the downfalls are that The Natural Areas Program cannot protect urban nature while simultaneously accommodating all forms of recreation enjoyed by the public without restriction. Also off-leash dogs and feral cats can kill these endangered species. | 2B - Some of the downfalls are that The Natural Areas Program cannot protect urban nature while simultaneously accommodating all forms of recreation enjoyed by the public without restriction. Also off-leash dogs and feral cats can kill these endangered species. | ||
| - | + | {{OK}} | |
3B - I think it has potential to be a good solution. At least they are trying to do something for the area. If they are a good program like everyone says, then something good will surely come out of their work. | 3B - I think it has potential to be a good solution. At least they are trying to do something for the area. If they are a good program like everyone says, then something good will surely come out of their work. | ||
Current revision as of 13:57, 3 April 2006
|
G |
| OK |
1A - The issue is in how people plan ahead of time how they will set up their towns and cities to make them better in the future. Some of the problems are spending less time with family due to driving to and from work, pollution would also rise, and having to spend more money on gas.
| OK |
1B - If it were my town I would try to make traffic easier to deal with, nobody likes to wait in traffic for ever. In a town like Carbondale jobs are limited, so I would also like to see more jobs come up.
| OK |
2A - The benefits are that they are protecting endangered animals and plants in the area, some of which are only found in that part of the world.
| OK |
2B - Some of the downfalls are that The Natural Areas Program cannot protect urban nature while simultaneously accommodating all forms of recreation enjoyed by the public without restriction. Also off-leash dogs and feral cats can kill these endangered species.
| OK |
3B - I think it has potential to be a good solution. At least they are trying to do something for the area. If they are a good program like everyone says, then something good will surely come out of their work.
