Croatia and Italy were two countries of similar size and population located on opposite shores of the same sea. Croatia based its economy on tourism and fishing, while Italy based its economy on conventional agriculture. Both countries had thriving economies, but they both polluted the sea in different ways. Which country caused less marine litter? Hint: Marine pollution is a generic term for the entry into the ocean of potentially hazardous chemicals or particles. The biggest culprits are rivers and with them many agriculture fertilizer chemicals as well as livestock and human waste. The excess of oxygen-depleting chemicals leads to hypoxia and the creation of a dead zone.Marine debris, which is also known as marine litter, describes human-created waste floating in a body of water. Oceanic debris tends to accumulate at the center of gyres and coastlines, frequently washing aground where it is known as beach litter.
Ans: Italy

Andy has a refrigerator in his house with lots of magnets on it as decorations. One day while playing with and rearranging them he decided to see what other metals around his kitchen they would stick to. The things he had available were copper pots and pans, aluminum foil and some wooden spatulas. Given Andy puts a magnet on the aluminum, will it have a magnetic attraction or no attraction? Hint: Magnetism is due to the movement of electrons within atoms of matter. When electrons spin around the nucleus of an atom, it causes the atom to become a tiny magnet, with north and south poles and a magnetic field. In most materials, the electrons orbiting the nuclei of the atoms are arranged in such a way that the materials have no magnetic properties. Also, in most types of matter, the north and south poles of atoms point in all different directions, so overall the matter is not magnetic. Examples of nonmagnetic materials include wood, glass, plastic, paper, copper, and aluminum. These materials are not attracted to magnets and cannot become magnets.
Ans: no attraction

Rob is an environmental scientist. He is studying the effect of insect species on environment. For his study he chose four locations, location A, location B, location C and the entire globe, which he denoted as location D. He noticed location A's loss of biodiversity is temporary , but location B's loss is permanent. Location C's loss of biodiversity yet to be determined. Could location D's biodiversity loss most likely be restored or not be restored? Hint: Biodiversity loss is the extinction of species (plant or animal) worldwide, and also the local reduction or loss of species in a certain habitat. The latter phenomenon can be temporary or permanent, depending on whether the environmental degradation that leads to the loss is reversible through ecological restoration / ecological resilience or effectively permanent (e.g. through land loss). Global extinction has so far been proven to be irreversible. Even though permanent global species loss is a more dramatic phenomenon than regional changes in species composition, even minor changes from a healthy stable state can have dramatic influence on the food web and the food chain insofar as reductions in only one species can adversely affect the entire chain (coextinction), leading to an overall reduction in biodiversity, possible alternative stable states of an ecosystem notwithstanding. Ecological effects of biodiversity are usually counteracted by its loss. Reduced biodiversity in particular leads to reduced ecosystem services and eventually poses an immediate danger for food security, also for humankind.[1]
Ans: not be restored

Iran an Iraq are 2 neighbors. Iraq produces its electricity by burning fossil fuels, while Iran uses nuclear fission as its energy source. Which country causes more global warming? Hint: In the U.S., the majority of electricity is produced by burning coal or other fossil fuels. This causes air pollution, acid rain, and global warming. Fossil fuels are also limited and may eventually run out. Like fossil fuels, radioactive elements are limited. In fact, they are relatively rare, so they could run out sooner rather than later. On the other hand, nuclear fission does not release air pollution or cause the other environmental problems associated with burning fossil fuels. This is the major advantage of using nuclear fission as a source of energy.
Ans: Iraq