TPO 36 integrated writing

While the passage holds the opinion that cloud seeding is an effective method for reducing hail and protecting field and farms, the lecturer casts some doubts on claims made by the author by demonstrating some logical reasons.

To start, the passage asserts that laboratory experiments has supported the favorable impact of cloud seeding on reduction of hail pellets. However, the speaker opposes this assertion by stating that although this experiment showed promising results in lab, in real life it may lead to the chance of prohibiting any precipitation. Therefore, not only it may not help the farmers but by increasing the likelihood of drought and lack of water it can cause them more difficulties as well.

Furthermore, the passage claims that in Asia this method was able to control precipitation in urban cities so it can also work for protecting farms in United states. The lecturer disputes this statement by mentioning that urban cities in Asia are polluted. Cloud seeding in those areas may cause interactions between clouds and chemicals which can have a significant role in its effectiveness. On the other hand, rural farm lands contain clean weather with no pollution which emphasises that cloud seeding may not work there.

Lastly, the writer establishes that some studies conducted in a farming region in US showed a decrease in crop damage due to hail as a result of cloud seeding. The speaker refutes this claim by bringing evidence that in that study there was also less hail damage in areas in north, south and east of following land. This demonstrates that the reduction of damage may have been caused by natural variation in local weather not cloud seeding.