After the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, one of the treatments included the addition of harmless, oil-eating bacteria. How could this be better than more traditional methods of cleaning up oil spills? A. When the bacteria finally die, it removes needed oxygen from the water. B. The addition of other harmful chemicals may be needed to speed up the process. C. The use of the bacteria, alone, could take years to completely remove the oil. D. The bacteria can break down harmful substances into simpler, less toxic substances.

Question

Biology

Conner Mullen

21 June, 10:22

After the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, one of the treatments included the addition of harmless, oil-eating bacteria. How could this be better than more traditional methods of cleaning up oil spills? A. When the bacteria finally die, it removes needed oxygen from the water. B. The addition of other harmful chemicals may be needed to speed up the process. C. The use of the bacteria, alone, could take years to completely remove the oil. D. The bacteria can break down harmful substances into simpler, less toxic substances.

+4

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Guzman · Answer 1

D. Everything else is clearly negative, and you’re trying to prove the bacteria are better than traditional methods.

A says they’re removing needed oxygen, which is bad

B says they add harmful chemicals, bad

C says they take a long time, bad

D says they do their job well, good