I read this background article the other day: The Keystone XL Pipeline would transport oil from the oil sands in Alberta, Canada. The oil would travel into the United States. In the U.S. it would be refined. The pipeline is controversial. A leak could cause damage to wildlife habitat. A leak could also release enough oil to contaminate the Ogallala Aquifer. The Aquifer is crucial to agriculture and urban development in the Midwestern U.S. When burned, the fuel from the oil sands would increase pollutants. Greenhouse gases into the atmosphere would increase. The future of the pipeline is currently on hold. I am facing a new situation today: Lawmakers were debating the pros and cons of Keystone XL Pipeline. One group of lawmakers proposed that the pipeline be constructed. They put their proposal in proposal A. The rival group of lawmakers proposed that the pipeline should not be build. They put their proposal in proposal B. Lawmakers would now have to choose one of the proposals. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which proposal would result in less pollutants, proposal A or proposal B?
Ans: proposal B

I read this background article the other day: Huge amounts of chemicals, such as fertilizers and pesticides, are applied to farm fields (see Figure below ). Some of the chemicals are picked up by rainwater. Runoff then carries the chemicals to nearby rivers or lakes. Dissolved fertilizer causes too much growth of water plants and algae. This can lead to dead zones where nothing can live in lakes and at the mouths of rivers. Some of the chemicals can infiltrate into groundwater. The contaminated water comes up in water wells. If people drink the polluted water, they may get sick. I am facing a new situation today: John studies how chemicals affect environment. He traveled to the Amish country to see their traditional ways of farming. He noticed they don't use any fertilizers or pesticides. He labeled this part of the study as case A. Then he visited a modern farming facility where they use tons of fertilizers and pesticides. He labeled this part of the study as case B. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which place would see less growth of algae, case A or case B?
Ans: case A

I read this background article the other day: Compared to conventional milk production, organic milk production tends to have lower eutrophication potential per ton of milk or per hectare of farmland, because it potentially reduces leaching of nitrates (NO3) and phosphates (PO4) due to lower fertilizer application rates. Because organic milk production reduces pesticides utilization, it increases land use per ton of milk due to decreased crop yields per hectare. Mainly due to the lower level of concentrates given to cows in organic herds, organic dairy farms generally produce less milk per cow than conventional dairy farms. Because of the increased use of roughage and the, on-average, lower milk production level per cow, some research has connected organic milk production with increases in the emission of methane.Animal welfare issues vary among dairy farms and are not necessarily related to the way of producing milk (organically or conventionally). I am facing a new situation today: Two different countries have different approaches to milk production. Austria produced organic milk, while Hungary produced conventional milk. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which country reduced leaching of phosphates from farms?
Ans: Austria

I read this background article the other day: Clouds on Earth are made of water vapor. Venus's clouds are a lot less pleasant. They are made of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide and large amounts of corrosive sulfuric acid! The atmosphere of Venus is so thick that the pressure on the surface of Venus is very high. In fact, it is 90 times greater than the pressure at Earth's surface! The thick atmosphere causes a strong greenhouse effect. As a result, Venus is the hottest planet. Even though it is farther from the Sun, Venus is much hotter even than Mercury. Temperatures at the surface reach 465C (860F). That's hot enough to melt lead! I am facing a new situation today: Some students studied Earth's atmosphere in class. They also started studying Venus' atmosphere. They were fascinated by the subject and learned a lot. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which planet has an atmosphere that is not toxic to humans, Venus or Earth?
Ans: Earth