Question

Direction: Read the following passage and Answer the THREE questions that follow.
As the biggest companies strive to trumpet their environmental activism, the need to match words with deeds is becoming increasingly important. Household names like Costco and Netflix have not provided emissions reduction targets despite saying they want to reduce their impact on climate change. Others, like the agricultural giant Cargill and the clothing company Levi Strauss, have made commitments but have struggled to cut emissions. Technology companies like Google and Microsoft, which run power-hungry data centers, have slashed emissions, but even they are finding that the technology often doesn’t yet exist to carry out their “moonshot” objectives. You can look at a company’s website and see their sustainability report and it will look great, But then when you look at what is behind it, you’ll see there is not a lot of substance behind those commitments or the commitments are not comprehensive enough. To realize the necessary emission reductions, more ambitious targets urgently need to be set. Otherwise, we project emissions for S&P 500 companies will end up being triple of what they should be in 2050 . Slashing emissions is difficult. Businesses must reliably measure how much carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases they are responsible for. Then companies have to find cleaner energy sources without hurting their operations. Where they can’t find cleaner substitutes, businesses often pay others to reduce emissions or remove carbon from the atmosphere. The task gets even harder when companies begin the process of reducing so-called Scope 3 emissions — pollution caused by suppliers and customers. At oil companies, for example, Scope 3 would include emissions from cars that use gasoline. Other companies that have pledged to cut emissions face different challenges, including coordinating with suppliers and partners. Consider the apparel industry. Much of its contribution to climate change comes from its supply chain. The clothes that Levi Strauss and others put their labels on are often made in factories in places like China, Pakistan and India that remain reliant on coal-fired power plants. The clothes are transported on ships and planes that burn diesel and jet fuel. If we are going to achieve a net-zero carbon economy for real, we will need everyone to act,” said Lucas Joppa, Microsoft’s chief environmental officer. “And that means action can’t be voluntary. We need requirements and standards that everyone is expected to meet.
According to the passage, what would be closest to the idea of a “moonshot” objective?

• A. A giant corporation growing incrementally at 5% a year.
• B. A college professor who takes extra classes regularly.
• C. An executive who performs various tasks every day.
• D. A startup firm that has targeted tripling of its revenues every year.
• E. A group of industrialists announcing modest cuts in emissions for their companies.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is D

Passage Summary-The passage is about companies failing in achieving their environmental goals for various reasons. Some industries such as the tech industry have fared relatively better in cutting emissions that other industries such as the oil and apparel industries that involve scope 3 emissions.

A moonshot objective is an extremely ambitious objective to achieve a monumental goal. In other words, a very big objective.

Options A, B, C and E do not imply any big objectives but rather small or modest ones.

Option D is a very big and monumental goal set by the startup firm.

Hence, the correct Answer is option D.