Environmental Design & Evidence-Based Capstone — Practice · Grade 12 Science
Chapter: Conservation, Systems & Environmental DesignWhat this practice covers
By the end of Environmental Design & Evidence-Based Capstone you should be able to:
- I can compare a baseline and alternatives using explicit criteria and calculations.
- I can plan sensitivity analysis and monitoring that addresses confounding variables.
8 questions, numeric and written answer, each with a worked explanation.
Vocabulary used: baseline, sensitivity analysis, simple payback.
Problem 1
Hints
Write the relationship first; substitute with consistent units.
Answer and explanation
30 kWh/year
.020×1500=30.
Problem 2
Answer and explanation
It makes change and added benefit measurable rather than assuming every new option is better.
Response criteria
- State a scientifically accurate conclusion.
- Show the calculation or mechanism that supports it.
- Include units, conditions, or limits where relevant.
Problem 3
Hints
List the given quantities, select a relationship, and check units before substituting.
Answer and explanation
5 years
500/100=5, excluding other costs.
Problem 4
Hints
Write the relationship first; substitute with consistent units.
Answer and explanation
3 years
900/300=3.
Problem 5
Hints
Use provided datasets for analysis; do not consume experimental treated water.
Answer and explanation
10×(1−0.40)=6 mg/L; this calculation alone does not establish safety.
Problem 6
Hints
State what the supplied observations or conditions establish, and separate that from any assumption.
Answer and explanation
Problem, criteria, mechanism, alternatives, methods, data, uncertainty, trade-offs, limitations and a monitoring/revision plan tied to measurable outcomes.
Problem 7
Answer and explanation
Its 40-unit extra up-front burden exceeds its 30-unit one-year saving, before replacement impacts and other criteria are considered.
An alternatives analysis compares multiple feasible designs under the same service definition. Here B uses 30 fewer energy units per year but has 40 additional up-front units, giving an energy break-even around 1.33 years if conditions persist. Lifespan, maintenance and service quality can change that conclusion. Examine a plausible range and identify what would reverse the ranking; report non-energy criteria alongside the selected account rather than hiding them inside one unsupported score.
Its 40-unit extra up-front burden exceeds its 30-unit one-year saving, before replacement impacts and other criteria are considered.
Response criteria
- Interpret labels, structures, axes, units and directions correctly.
- Explain the physical or environmental relationship or mechanism.
- Respect stated assumptions and distinguish observation from inference.
Problem 8
Answer and explanation
Annual saving=0.012×1500=18 kWh. Energy break-even=24/18≈1.33 years under fixed use/lifespan assumptions. Measure service adequacy, reliability, actual hours, access or maintenance as a separate pilot outcome.
Annual saving=0.012×1500=18 kWh.
Energy break-even=24/18≈1.33 years under fixed use/lifespan assumptions.
Measure service adequacy, reliability, actual hours, access or maintenance as a separate pilot outcome.
Response criteria
- Use the stated measurements or conditions, with correct units.
- Connect the result to the physical or environmental mechanism or evidence relationship.
- Identify the assumption, model limit or further evidence requested.