What did you think of short answer section?
I reckon it was pretty good this year. They could've made the ethanol one 7 marks instead of 5, but hey, im not complaining.
The way the put the water purifying question in there was a little different - asessing catchment area features, smart move by BOS.
A lot of calculations involved, which I was happy about, and no really long responses, which was good.
Overall, I am really happy with the paper.data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1c4fb/1c4fb4a004ac374ae735c210f8560be0dce354ac" alt="Smile :) :)"
I reckon it was pretty good this year. They could've made the ethanol one 7 marks instead of 5, but hey, im not complaining.
The way the put the water purifying question in there was a little different - asessing catchment area features, smart move by BOS.
A lot of calculations involved, which I was happy about, and no really long responses, which was good.
Overall, I am really happy with the paper.