Which section provides the most evidence supporting the need for new improved biodegradable plastics the right answer is what the scientists found the wrong answer that I chose how biodegradable plastics don't live up to their name

Question

And wanted to sentences how do I explain why I got this question wrong and what I learned from the right answer

Answer 1

To explain why you got the question wrong, you could say:

"I chose the answer that highlighted the underperformance of existing biodegradable plastics. While this is certainly relevant, it doesn't directly address the evidence needed to support the development of new improved biodegradable plastics. The correct answer focused on what scientists found, which provides concrete evidence of the limitations and environmental impacts of current options, making a clearer case for the necessity of innovation in this field."

From the right answer, you learned that understanding the scientific research behind biodegradable plastics is crucial for recognizing gaps in current technologies. This emphasizes the importance of evidence-based findings in advocating for advancements that genuinely address environmental concerns. This also reminds you that focusing on research outcomes can provide a stronger foundation for supporting change than merely pointing out shortcomings in existing products.

Answer 2

Can you summarize that in two sentences

Answer 3

I initially chose the answer regarding the shortcomings of existing biodegradable plastics, but that did not provide enough evidence for the need for improvements. The correct answer emphasized scientific findings, highlighting specific limitations that underscore the necessity for developing better biodegradable alternatives.