Required information Skip to question Working with Graphs Graphs are one of the most common and important ways scientists communicate their results. Learning to understand graphing techniques—the language of graphs—will help you better understand this book. Graphs are visual presentations of data that help us identify trends and understand relationships. We could present a table of numbers, but most of us have difficulty seeing a pattern in a large field of numbers. In a graph, we can quickly and easily see trends and relationships. Below is a graph showing ecological footprints. Often we pass quickly over graphs like these that appear in text, but it’s rewarding to investigate them more closely, because their relationships can raise interesting questions. Answer the numbered questions below to make sure you understand graphs and graphing. First make sure you know the parts of a graph. Usually there is a horizontal axis (also known as the “X-axis”) and a vertical axis (the “Y-axis”). Usually, there is a dependent variable (Y) that changes in response to an independent variable (X). In this case ecological footprint (Y) varies among countries (X). The questions below are where you should start any time you look at a new graph. For a full discussion of ecological footprints and the many components that contribute to its calculation and to calculate your own footprint, visit the Global Footprint Network (opens in a new tab). "The horizontal axis represents countries, while the vertical axis represents ecological footprint ranging from 0 through 12 in increments of 2.The data is as follows:Top 10:Qatar: Carbon emissions: 8.4; Cropland: 1.1; grazing land: 1.5; forest: 0.2; fishing ground: 0.4; and built-up land: 0.2.Kuwait:Carbon emissions: 7.8; Cropland: 8.3; grazing land: 0.7; forest: 0.3; fishing ground: 0.3; and built-up land: 0.2.United Arab Emirates:Carbon emissions: 5.9; Cropland: 0.5; grazing land: 1.4; forest: 0.4; fishing ground: 0.3; and built-up land: 0.1.Denmark:Carbon emissions: 2.4; Cropland: 2.9; grazing land: 0.7; forest: 1.2; fishing ground: 0.7; and built-up land: 0.2.United States of America: Carbon emissions: 5; Cropland: 0.9; grazing land: 0.2; forest: 1; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Belgium:Carbon emissions: 3.2; Cropland: 1.8; grazing land: 0.9; forest: 0.4; fishing ground: 0.2; and built-up land: 0.3.Australia:Carbon emissions: 2.6; Cropland: 1.6; grazing land: 1; forest: 0.8; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Canada:Carbon emissions: 3.7; Cropland: 1.3; grazing land: 0.3; forest: 0.4; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Netherlands:Carbon emissions: 3; Cropland: 1.3; grazing land: 1.2; forest: 0.5; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Ireland:Carbon emissions: 3.8; Cropland: 1.2; grazing land: 0.2; forest: 0.3; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Bottom 10:Congo:Cropland: 0.2; grazing land: 0.4; and built-up land: 0.1.Nepal:Carbon emissions: 0.1; Cropland: 0.3; forest: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Pakistan:Carbon emissions: 0.2; Cropland: 0.2; forest: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Rwanda:Carbon emissions: 0.1; Cropland: 0.3; forest: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Eritrea:Cropland: 0.2; grazing land: 0.2; forest land: 0.2; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Bangladesh:Carbon emissions: 0.2; Cropland: 0.2; forest: 0.1; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Haiti:Carbon emissions: 0.1; Cropland: 0.1; forest: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Afghanistan:Cropland: 0.2; grazing land: 0.2; and built-up land: 0.1.Timor-Leste:Carbon emissions: 0.1; Cropland: 0.2; forest: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Palestinian territory:Carbon emissions: 0.1; Cropland: 0.2; and forest: 0.1.Note: All data is approximate." Approximately what proportion of the total footprint for the United States is represented by croplands?单项选择题

题目图片
A

all of it

B

approximately 75%

C

approximately 50%

D

approximately 15%

登录即可查看完整答案

我们收录了全球超50000道真实原题与详细解析,现在登录,立即获得答案。

类似问题

Required information Skip to question Working with Graphs Graphs are one of the most common and important ways scientists communicate their results. Learning to understand graphing techniques—the language of graphs—will help you better understand this book. Graphs are visual presentations of data that help us identify trends and understand relationships. We could present a table of numbers, but most of us have difficulty seeing a pattern in a large field of numbers. In a graph, we can quickly and easily see trends and relationships. Below is a graph showing ecological footprints. Often we pass quickly over graphs like these that appear in text, but it’s rewarding to investigate them more closely, because their relationships can raise interesting questions. Answer the numbered questions below to make sure you understand graphs and graphing. First make sure you know the parts of a graph. Usually there is a horizontal axis (also known as the “X-axis”) and a vertical axis (the “Y-axis”). Usually, there is a dependent variable (Y) that changes in response to an independent variable (X). In this case ecological footprint (Y) varies among countries (X). The questions below are where you should start any time you look at a new graph. For a full discussion of ecological footprints and the many components that contribute to its calculation and to calculate your own footprint, visit the Global Footprint Network (opens in a new tab). "The horizontal axis represents countries, while the vertical axis represents ecological footprint ranging from 0 through 12 in increments of 2.The data is as follows:Top 10:Qatar: Carbon emissions: 8.4; Cropland: 1.1; grazing land: 1.5; forest: 0.2; fishing ground: 0.4; and built-up land: 0.2.Kuwait:Carbon emissions: 7.8; Cropland: 8.3; grazing land: 0.7; forest: 0.3; fishing ground: 0.3; and built-up land: 0.2.United Arab Emirates:Carbon emissions: 5.9; Cropland: 0.5; grazing land: 1.4; forest: 0.4; fishing ground: 0.3; and built-up land: 0.1.Denmark:Carbon emissions: 2.4; Cropland: 2.9; grazing land: 0.7; forest: 1.2; fishing ground: 0.7; and built-up land: 0.2.United States of America: Carbon emissions: 5; Cropland: 0.9; grazing land: 0.2; forest: 1; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Belgium:Carbon emissions: 3.2; Cropland: 1.8; grazing land: 0.9; forest: 0.4; fishing ground: 0.2; and built-up land: 0.3.Australia:Carbon emissions: 2.6; Cropland: 1.6; grazing land: 1; forest: 0.8; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Canada:Carbon emissions: 3.7; Cropland: 1.3; grazing land: 0.3; forest: 0.4; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Netherlands:Carbon emissions: 3; Cropland: 1.3; grazing land: 1.2; forest: 0.5; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Ireland:Carbon emissions: 3.8; Cropland: 1.2; grazing land: 0.2; forest: 0.3; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Bottom 10:Congo:Cropland: 0.2; grazing land: 0.4; and built-up land: 0.1.Nepal:Carbon emissions: 0.1; Cropland: 0.3; forest: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Pakistan:Carbon emissions: 0.2; Cropland: 0.2; forest: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Rwanda:Carbon emissions: 0.1; Cropland: 0.3; forest: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Eritrea:Cropland: 0.2; grazing land: 0.2; forest land: 0.2; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Bangladesh:Carbon emissions: 0.2; Cropland: 0.2; forest: 0.1; fishing ground: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Haiti:Carbon emissions: 0.1; Cropland: 0.1; forest: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Afghanistan:Cropland: 0.2; grazing land: 0.2; and built-up land: 0.1.Timor-Leste:Carbon emissions: 0.1; Cropland: 0.2; forest: 0.1; and built-up land: 0.1.Palestinian territory:Carbon emissions: 0.1; Cropland: 0.2; and forest: 0.1.Note: All data is approximate." Which component (color) is the greatest for the countries with the highest footprints? the lowest footprints?

Project A has a required return on 9.2 percent and cash flows of −$87,000, $32,600, $35,900, and $43,400 for Years 0 to 3, respectively. Project B has a required return of 12.7 percent and cash flows of −$85,000, $14,700, $21,200, and $89,800 for Years 0 to 3, respectively. Which project(s) should you accept based on net present value if the projects are mutually exclusive?

You are considering two mutually exclusive projects. Project A has cash flows of −$72,000, $21,400, $22,900, and $56,300 for Years 0 to 3, respectively. Project B has cash flows of −$81,000, $20,100, $22,200, and $74,800 for Years 0 to 3, respectively. Both projects have a required 2.5-year payback period. Should you accept or reject these projects based on payback analysis?

You own a bond that pays $64 in interest annually. The face value is $1,000 and the current market price is $1,021.61. The bond matures in 11 years. What is the yield to maturity?

更多留学生实用工具

加入我们,立即解锁 海量真题独家解析,让复习快人一步!