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.
Which of the following statement(s) is NOT in consonance with the author’s views, as expressed in the passage?

• A. A few eminent companies have still not given any commitments to reduce emissions.
• B. Oil and apparel companies have a more difficult task than tech companies when it comes to reducing emissions.
• C. Companies buying carbon credits from others are environmental activists.
• D. The technologies to cut emissions substantially may not exist at this point in time.
• E. The emissions of S&P 500 companies will increase greatly by 2050

Answer 1

Answer: (E)

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.

Option A is stated by the author. ‘Household names like Costco and Netflix have not provided emissions reduction targets despite saying they want to reduce their impact on climate change.’

Option B is stated by the author. ‘The task gets even harder when companies begin the process of reducing so-called Scope 3 emissions — pollution caused by suppliers and customers.’

Option C is mentioned by the author to be a valid environmental act. ‘Where they can’t find cleaner substitutes, businesses often pay others to reduce emissions or remove carbon from the atmosphere.’

Option D is stated by the author. ‘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.’

Option E distorts the author’s assertions. ‘To realise 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.’ However, since most companies have committed to substantial emission cuts by 2050, the target being tripled in 2050 need not mean that emissions are on the rise but rather that the declines in emissions have been slow and gradual.

Hence, the correct Answer is option E.