Turn on thread page Beta

Can anyone please read this guy's handwriting? watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    https://qualifications.pearson.com/c...f_20170816.pdf
    In this examiner report in the very last question which talk about engineering approaches for Venice there is a modular answer which I am really keen on looking at, again problem is that this guy's handwriting is really horrendous and I wonder how the examiners managed to read it as I myself was struggling for hours reading this guy's handwriting. If anyone can read this guy's handwriting and type it out for me it would help me a lot
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I got 10 free mins i will see how far i get
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Venices fragile environment is definetly in need of management and the hard engineering approaches will contribute a bit to the issues in the environment.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Venice, on the Adriatic plate is subsiding 2-3mm per year, which combined with global sea levels rising means the city is vunerable to sinking. By 2050 in some places sea levels will have risen by 50cm and only 20-30cm is need in venice for it to be above the proposed gates. Meaning they eould contribute for a number of years to the problem then the water would flow over them anyways. Also it would be expensive for the 79 steel gates to be constructed and would reduce the 150$mil a year the city gains from tourism as they would be closed preventing tourists from entering at high tide.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Sorry im out of time i only managed the intro and first paragraph hopefully someone will finish it off for me. Please ignore any spelling or grammar mistakes - theyre probably me i was typing a bit fast. The topic looks really interesting though.
    Offline

    21
    Continuing...

    "The gates would also not contribute to the issue of the earthquakes which occur in Venice. Declared a heritage site 30 years ago, the building in Venice are very old and vulnerable to the impacts an earthquake would have on Venice. The are no hard engineering approaches that can prevent the earthquakes or even reduce the impact that they have. Even though they have been reducing in magnitude another big one could easily happen on/in the active fault and have a big impact on the city. The fragility of Venice’s environment in regard to tectonic processes is fairly unmanageable and the hard engineering approaches do certainly not contribute to managing this.”

    Another paragraph for you
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Copied exactly as they have written the answer. Some grammatical and punctuation mistakes on their part, but I am certain you can identify them yourself--these things happen when people are writing in exam conditions.

    Venice's fragile environment is definitely in need of managing and the hard engineering approaches will contribute a bit to the issues in the environment.

    Venice, on the Adriatic plate is subsiding 2-3 mm per year, which combined with global sea level rising means the city is vulnerable to sinking. By 2050, in some places sea level will have risen by 50 cm and only 20-30 cm is needed in Venice for it to be above the proposed gates. Meaning they would contribute for a number of years to the problem then the water would flow over them anyway. Also it would be expensive for the 79 steel gates to be constructed and would also reduce the 150 million euros a year the city gains from tourism as they would be closed preventing tourists entering at high tide.

    The gates would also not contribute to the issues of the earthquakes that occur in Venice. Declared a heritage site 30 years ago the buildings in Venice are very old and vulnerable to the impacts an earthquake would have in Venice. There are no hard engineering processes to prevent the earthquakes or even reduce the impact they have. Even though they have been reducing in magnitude another big one could easily happen on this active fault and have a big impact on the city. The fragility of Venice's environment in regard to tectonic processes is fairly unmanageable and the hard engineering approaches do certainly not contribute to managing this.

    The steel gates proposed as the hard engineering approach to manage Venice's fragile environment would contribute to reducing flooding in all the land around the Venice lagoon as the lagoon would no longer be tidal. This would allow steps to be taken in Venice to protect the city against flooding and the subsidising of the Adriatic plate such as raising the height of some buildings (this doesn't make perfect sense, so I assume it was a goof up due to the pressure). Also this would benefit the vineyards as they wouldn't get flooding and can make money to make up for the possible loss of tourism. However tourism wouldn't drop too far as the gates would protect Venice airport as well. All this is contributed to by the hard engineering approaches.

    In conclusion the hard engineering approaches do have some beneficial contributions. But they also have negative ones (drop in tourism). And they do not protect against the other fragile environment conditions such as tectonic ones so overall their contribution is limited.
    Offline

    21
    (Original post by dandiprat)
    Copied exactly as they have written the answer. Some grammatical and punctuation mistakes on their part, but I am certain you can identify them yourself--these things happen when people are writing in exam conditions.

    Venice's fragile environment is definitely in need of managing and the hard engineering approaches will contribute a bit to the issues in the environment.

    Venice, on the Adriatic plate is subsiding 2-3 mm per year, which combined with global sea level rising means the city is vulnerable to sinking. By 2050, in some places sea level will have risen by 50 cm and only 20-30 cm is needed in Venice for it to be above the proposed gates. Meaning they would contribute for a number of years to the problem then the water would flow over them anyway. Also it would be expensive for the 79 steel gates to be constructed and would also reduce the 150 million euros a year the city gains from tourism as they would be closed preventing tourists entering at high tide.

    The gates would also not contribute to the issues of the earthquakes that occur in Venice. Declared a heritage site 30 years ago the buildings in Venice are very old and vulnerable to the impacts an earthquake would have in Venice. There are no hard engineering processes to prevent the earthquakes or even reduce the impact they have. Even though they have been reducing in magnitude another big one could easily happen on this active fault and have a big impact on the city. The fragility of Venice's environment in regard to tectonic processes is fairly unmanageable and the hard engineering approaches do certainly not contribute to managing this.

    The steel gates proposed as the hard engineering approach to manage Venice's fragile environment would contribute to reducing flooding in all the land around the Venice lagoon as the lagoon would no longer be tidal. This would allow steps to be taken in Venice to protect the city against flooding and the subsidising of the Adriatic plate such as raising the height of some buildings (this doesn't make perfect sense, so I assume it was a goof up due to the pressure). Also this would benefit the vineyards as they wouldn't get flooding and can make money to make up for the possible loss of tourism. However tourism wouldn't drop too far as the gates would protect Venice airport as well. All this is contributed to by the hard engineering approaches.

    In conclusion the hard engineering approaches do have some beneficial contributions. But they also have negative ones (drop in tourism). And they do not protect against the other fragile environment conditions such as tectonic ones so overall their contribution is limited.
    Lol I'd just finished the last bit. Prsom
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Continued from starfab...

    The steel gates proposed as the hard engineering approach to manage Venice's fragile environment would contribute to reducing the flooding in all the land around the Venice lagoon as the lagoon would no longer be tidal. This would allow steps to be taken in Venice to protect the city against flooding and the subsidising of the Adriatic Plate such as raising the height of some buildings. Also, this would benefit the vineyards as they wouldn't get flooding and can make money to make up for the probable loss of tourism. However, tourism wouldn't drop too far, as the gates would protect the airport, as well. All this is contributed to by the hard engineering approaches.

    In conclusion, the hard engineering approaches do have some beneficial contributions. But also they have negative ones (pollution, drop in tourism). And they do not protect against the other fragile environment conditions such as tectonic ones, so overall their contribution is limited.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Well, that was a waste of about 10 minutes of my life.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L S)
    Well, that was a waste of about 10 minutes of my life.
    (Original post by starfab)
    Lol I'd just finished the last bit. Prsom
    ****, my thirst to help just chipped 10 minutes off of two TSR users' lives.
    Offline

    21
    (Original post by dandiprat)
    ****, my thirst to help just chipped 10 minutes off of two TSR users' lives.
    :rofl:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by L S)
    Well, that was a waste of about 10 minutes of my life.
    Don't worry I gave you a rep, I made that 10 mins worth it for you!
 
 
 

2,727

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
Useful resources
AtCTs

Ask the Community Team

Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

Welcome Lounge

Welcome Lounge

We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.