1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
xz_007 [3.2K]
3 years ago
14

Increased use of incineration is sometimes advocated as a safe way to dispose of chemical waste. But opponents of incineration p

oint to the 40 incidents involving unexpected releases of dangerous chemical agents that were reported just last year at two existing incinerators commissioned to destroy a quantity of chemical waste material. Since designs for proposed new incinerators include no additional means of preventing such releases, leaks will only become more prevalent if use of incineration increases.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) At the two incinerators at which leaks were reported, staff had had only cursory training on the proper procedures for incinerating chemical waste.

(B) Other means of disposing of chemical waste, such as chemical neutralization processes, have not been proven safer than incineration.

(C) The capacity of existing incinerators is sufficient to allow for increased incineration of chemical waste without any need for new incinerators.

(D) The frequency of reports of unexpected releases of chemical agents at newly built incinerators is about the same as the frequency at older incinerators.

(E) ln only three of the reported incidents of unexpected chemical leaks did the releases extend outside the property on which the incinerators were located.
Chemistry
1 answer:
pochemuha3 years ago
5 0

Answer:

Option A is correct.

At the two incinerators at which leaks were reported, staff had had only cursory training on the proper procedures for incinerating chemical waste.

Explanation:

The main aim of the argument presented is to talk down the use of burning by incinerators method to dispose chemical waste. The argument presents great points in that there were 40 incidents at two existing commissioned incinerators in the last year where unexpected releases of dangerous chemical agents happened.

So, basically, the argument is all about how the high frequency of the unsuspected release of dangerous chemical agents should discourage this method of chemical waste disposal.

The argument then concluded that if more chemical waste are disposed using the burning by incinerator method, there will be more unsuspected release of dangerous chemicals.

We are then required to find the statement that most weakens the conclusion that there will be more toxic releases if more chemical waste are burned.

Analysing the Statements one by one

Statement A

This statement provides a possible reason for this high frequency of dangerous chemical releases. It states that the staff haven't been properly trained. So, this means that properly training the staff should most likely lead to lesser cases of toxic releases into the environment.

This is the statement that most weakens the conclusion.

Statement B

The conclusion wasn't about the incinerator method being the safest method. It was about whether increased incineration would lead to more toxic relaeses. So, this doesn't affect the conclusion.

Statement C

This statement says that incineration can be increased without building new incinerators by tapping into unused capacity at the old incinerators. Also doesn't affect rhe conclusion whether increased use of incineration will lead to more toxic leaks.

Statement D

This statement strengthens the argument; which is the opposite of what we're aiming to achieve.

Statement E

This statement hints that the toxic leaks do not have that much of a harmful effect because the toxic releases do not go beyond the property of the incinerator. This also doesnt tackle the conclusion about the frequency of leaks, it only addresses how not harmful the toxic leaks can be.

Hope this Helps!!!

You might be interested in
1What is one major difference between fossil fuels and biofuels?
Margarita [4]
The correct answer is A
4 0
3 years ago
As the concentration of a KOH solution increases, the number of moles of HCl needed to neutralize the KOH solution?
Soloha48 [4]

B) increasesAnswer:

Explanation:

8 0
2 years ago
When a reaction takes place in a SEALED FLASK,<br> the TOTAL MASS of the system...
Doss [256]
It should remain constant because of the law of conservation of mass and because the flask is sealed no mass will escape
7 0
3 years ago
Which of the following represents the atomic number of an element?
Anna11 [10]

Answer:

The atomic number is the number of protons in the nucleus

4 0
2 years ago
You mix 200. mL of 0.400M HCl with 200. mL of 0.400M NaOH in a coffee cup calorimeter. The temperature of the solution goes from
GuDViN [60]

Answer : The enthalpy of neutralization is, 56.012 kJ/mole

Explanation :

First we have to calculate the moles of HCl and NaOH.

\text{Moles of HCl}=\text{Concentration of HCl}\times \text{Volume of solution}=0.400mole/L\times 0.200L=0.08mol

\text{Moles of NaOH}=\text{Concentration of NaOH}\times \text{Volume of solution}=0.400mole/L\times 0.200L=0.08mol

The balanced chemical reaction will be,

HCl+NaOH\rightarrow NaCl+H_2O

From the balanced reaction we conclude that,

As, 1 mole of HCl neutralizes by 1 mole of NaOH

So, 0.08 mole of HCl neutralizes by 0.08 mole of NaOH

Thus, the number of neutralized moles = 0.08 mole

Now we have to calculate the mass of water.

As we know that the density of water is 1 g/ml. So, the mass of water will be:

The volume of water = 200mL+200L=400mL

\text{Mass of water}=\text{Density of water}\times \text{Volume of water}=1g/ml\times 400mL=400g

Now we have to calculate the heat absorbed during the reaction.

q=m\times c\times (T_{final}-T_{initial})

where,

q = heat absorbed = ?

c = specific heat of water = 4.18J/g^oC

m = mass of water = 400 g

T_{final} = final temperature of water = 27.78^oC=273+25.10=300.78K

T_{initial} = initial temperature of metal = 25.10^oC=273+27.78=298.1K

Now put all the given values in the above formula, we get:

q=400g\times 4.18J/g^oC\times (300.78-298.1)K

q=4480.96J

Thus, the heat released during the neutralization = -4480.96 J

Now we have to calculate the enthalpy of neutralization.

\Delta H=\frac{q}{n}

where,

\Delta H = enthalpy of neutralization = ?

q = heat released = -4480.96 J

n = number of moles used in neutralization = 0.08 mole

\Delta H=\frac{-4480.96J}{0.08mole}=-56012J/mole=-56.012kJ/mol

The negative sign indicate the heat released during the reaction.

Therefore, the enthalpy of neutralization is, 56.012 kJ/mole

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • I need help
    5·1 answer
  • The periodic table is organized by
    10·1 answer
  • Similarities between colloids and suspensions
    14·1 answer
  • KOH + H3 PO4+K3 PO4+H2O​
    11·1 answer
  • A typical deposit of cholesterol,C27H460,in an artery has a mass of 3.90mg.how many molecules of cholesterol are present in this
    7·1 answer
  • What is the Lewis structure for NbBr5
    14·1 answer
  • What is the density of an object with a mass of 60 g and a volume of 2 cm3?
    12·1 answer
  • What physical and chemical properties should braces (used to straighten teeth possess in order to attain its desired goal to str
    9·1 answer
  • six different aqueous solutions are represented in the beakers below, and there total volumes are noted. (a) which solution has
    12·1 answer
  • What would be the mass, in grams, of 2.408 x 1024 molecules of tetraphosphorus decaoxide?
    11·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!