I read this background article the other day: Sand mining is a direct cause of erosion, and impacts the local wildlife.[2] Various animals depend on sandy beaches for nesting clutches, and mining has led to the near extinction of gharials (a species of crocodile) in India. Disturbance of underwater and coastal sand causes turbidity in the water, which is harmful for organisms like coral that need sunlight. It can also destroy fisheries, financially harming their operators. Removal of physical coastal barriers, such as dunes, sometimes leads to flooding of beachside communities, and the destruction of picturesque beaches causes tourism to dissipate. Sand mining is regulated by law in many places, but is often done illegally.[3] Globally, it is a $70 billion industry, with sand selling at up to $90 per cubic yard.[4] I am facing a new situation today: The island of Utopia is a popular tourist destination with its great sandy beaches. Two of the most popular beaches are beach A and beach B. Both beaches also have large wildlife sanctuaries where rare dolphins can be seen. There are some fisheries in both beaches too. This year the government of Utopia is looking for more sources to increase their revenue. They decided to allow sand mining in beach A next year, and earn some extra revenue. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: In which beach fisheries might not financially struggle next year, beach A or beach B?
----
Answer: beach B

I read this background article the other day: Besides anthropogenic productivity of the land, the biodiversity of degraded land also declines, as previously mentioned.[12] With less biodiversity, this ecosystem is less adaptable to when disasters strike it[11][8] It has a smaller available food supply, in terms of plants, for animals, who then may die out or more likely may relocate. Proof of this decline is that presently 15-20% of Tibetan Plateau species are now considered endangered; and now because of this animal and plant absence, the soil quality of these degraded lands is very poor.[1] It does not hold the necessary nutrients, such as water, nitrogen, and carbon, essential to either supporting life or inviting life back to that land.[6] As a result of such carbon and nitrogen loss in the Tibetan Plateau, $8,033/ha and $13,315/ha were respectively lost in economic terms. Soils are further weakened by dust storms whose frequency increases because of degradation.[11][4] Erosion of soil becomes a bigger problem, since no longer are there as many plants to anchor in the soil. In the northern Chinese province alone, 400 million are affected every year with an associated 54 billion yuan of annual economic loss due to grassland degradation. I am facing a new situation today: The extensive grazing in Tibet lead to carbon and nitrogen loss, subject to desertification, while Nepal adopted a different approach to food production, putting nature and biodiversity first. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which country experiences a higher percentage of biodiversity loss?
----
Answer: Tibet

I read this background article the other day: Gas pressure results from collisions between gas particles and the inside walls of their container. If more gas is added to a rigid container, the gas pressure increases. The identities of the two gases do not matter. John Dalton, the English chemist who proposed the atomic theory, also studied mixtures of gases. He found that each gas in a mixture exerts a pressure independently of every other gas in the mixture. For example, our atmosphere is composed of about 78% nitrogen and 21% oxygen, with smaller amounts of several other gases making up the rest. Since nitrogen makes up 78% of the gas particles in a given sample of air, it exerts 78% of the pressure. If the overall atmospheric pressure is 1.00 atm, then the pressure of just the nitrogen in the air is 0.78 atm. The pressure of the oxygen in the air is 0.21 atm. I am facing a new situation today: Mike is a high school student who loves science and as a hobby studies various chemistry, biology and physics experiments. Currently, Mike has a container in his garage that is filled with two different gases. A large portion of the gas is Mologen and a smaller portion is the gas Hamogen. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: If the pressure inside the container was decreased, would particles collide with the container more or less frequently?
----
Answer:
less