In a low-carbon world, renewable energy technologies are hot business. For investors looking to redirect funds, wind turbines and solar panels, among other technologies, seem a straightforward choice. But renewables need to be further scrutinized before being championed as forging a path toward a low-carbon future. Both the direct and indirect impacts of renewable energy must be examined to ensure that a climate-smart future does not intensify social and environmental harm. As renewable energy production requires land, water, and labor, among other inputs, it imposes costs on people and the environment. Hydropower projects, for instance, have led to community dispossession and exclusion . . .Renewable energy supply chains are also intertwined with mining, and their technologies contribute to growing levels of electronic waste . . . Furthermore, although renewable energy can be produced and distributed through small-scale, local systems, such an approach might not generate the high returns on investment needed to attract capital. Although an emerging sector, renewables are enmeshed in long-standing resource extraction through their dependence on minerals and metals . . . Scholars document the negative consequences of mining . . . even for mining operations that commit to socially responsible practices[:] “many of the world’s largest reservoirs of minerals like cobalt, copper, lithium,[and] rare earth minerals”—the ones needed for renewable technologies— “are found in fragile states and under communities of marginalized peoples in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.” Since the demand for metals and minerals will increase substantially in a renewable-powered future . . . this intensification could exacerbate the existing consequences of extractive activities.
Among the connections between climate change and waste, O’Neill . . . highlights that “devices developed to reduce our carbon footprint, such as lithium batteries for hybrid and electric cars or solar panels[,] become potentially dangerous electronic waste at the end of their productive life.” The disposal of toxic waste has long perpetuated social injustice through the flows of waste to the Global South and to marginalized communities in the Global North . ..
While renewable energy is a more recent addition to financial portfolios, investments in the sector must be considered in light of our understanding of capital accumulation. As agricultural finance reveals, the concentration of control of corporate activity facilitates profit generation. For some climate activists, the promise of renewables rests on their ability not only to reduce emissions but also to provide distributed, democratized access to energy . . .But Burke and Stephens . . . caution that “renewable energy systems offer a possibility but not a certainty for more democratic energy futures.” Small-scale, distributed forms of energy are only highly profitable to institutional investors if control is consolidated somewhere in the financial chain. Renewable energy can be produced at the household or neighborhood level. However, such small-scale, localized production is unlikely to generate high returns for investors. For financial growth to be sustained and expanded by the renewable sector, production and trade in renewable energy technologies will need to be highly concentrated, and large asset management firms will likely drive those developments.
Based on the passage, we can infer that the author would be most supportive of which one of the following practices?
- The localised, small-scale development of renewable energy systems.
- More stringent global policies and regulations to ensure a more just system of toxic waste disposal.
- Encouragement for the development of more environment-friendly carbon-based fuels.
- The study of the coexistence of marginalised people with their environments.
The Correct Option is B
Solution and Explanation
Let's examine each option individually:
Option A's assertion is contradicted by the last paragraph, where the author advocates for the financial viability of localized small-scale production. Consequently, this option is also incorrect.
Option B accurately states, "many of the world’s largest reservoirs of minerals like cobalt, copper, lithium, [and] rare earth minerals”—the ones needed for renewable technologies—are found in fragile states and under communities of marginalized peoples in Africa, Asia, and Latin America." The passage suggests that the intensification of demand for these minerals could worsen the existing consequences of extractive activities if proper disposal of toxic materials is not ensured.
Option C suggests, "Encouragement for the development of more environment-friendly carbon-based fuels." Yet, the author explicitly discusses reducing carbon footprint in the third paragraph, indicating a stance against carbon-based fuels. Hence, this option is incorrect.
Option D proposes, "The study of the coexistence of marginalized people with their environments." However, this passage primarily discusses the impact of renewable energy on marginalized communities, not their coexistence. Therefore, we can disregard this option.
So, the correct answer is (B): More stringent global policies and regulations to ensure a more just system of toxic waste disposal.
All of the following statements, if true, could be seen as supporting the arguments in the passage, EXCEPT:
- Marginalised people in Africa, Asia and Latin America have often been the main sufferers of corporate mineral extraction projects.
- The example of agricultural finance helps us to see how to concentrate corporate activity in the renewable energy sector
- One reason for the perpetuation of social injustice lies in the problem of the disposal of toxic waste.
- The possible negative impacts of renewable energy need to be studied before it can be offered as a financial investment opportunity.
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
Read the final line of the passage: "For financial growth to be sustained and expanded by the renewable sector, production and trade in renewable energy technologies will need to be highly concentrated, and large asset management firms will likely drive those developments."
This line emphasizes the role of financial institutions and market concentration in expanding the renewable energy sector's economic potential. It does not suggest that the study of negative impacts is a precondition for offering renewables as an investment opportunity.
Therefore, the statement in Option D — "The possible negative impacts of renewable energy need to be studied before it can be offered as a financial investment opportunity" — is not supported by the passage.
Final Conclusion:
Option D is the correct answer because it introduces an idea (studying negative impacts as a prerequisite for investment) that is not found in the passage.
Which one of the following statements, if false, could be seen as best supporting the arguments in the passage?
- Renewable energy systems are not as profitable as non-renewable energy systems.
- Renewable energy systems are as expensive as non-renewable energy systems.
- The production and distribution of renewable energy through small-scale, localsystems is not economically sustainable.
- Renewable energy systems have little or no environmental impact.
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
Referring to the passage, the statement: "As renewable energy production requires land, water, and labor, among other inputs, it imposes costs on people and the environment. Hydropower projects, for instance, have led to community dispossession and exclusion..."
Option Analysis:
- Option A: Correct.
The passage supports that non-renewable energy systems tend to be more profitable than small-scale renewables. - Option B: Correct.
It is valid because large investments are necessary for significant returns in renewable energy infrastructure. - Option C: Correct.
The passage notes: "Renewable energy can be produced at the household or neighborhood level. However, such small-scale, localized production is unlikely to generate high returns for investors." - Option D: Incorrect / Contradicted.
This option claims: "Renewable energy systems have little or no environmental impact."
But the passage directly contradicts this by emphasizing the social and environmental costs associated with renewable energy production.
Final Conclusion:
The correct answer is Option D, because it is explicitly contradicted by the information in the passage.
Which one of the following statements, if true, could be an accurate inference from the first paragraph of the passage?
The author has reservations about the consequences of non-renewable energy systems.
- The author’s only reservation is about the profitability of renewable energy systems.
- The author has reservations about the consequences of renewable energy systems.
- The author does not think renewable energy systems can be as efficient as non-renewable energy systems.
The Correct Option is C
Solution and Explanation
The author has reservations about the consequences of renewable energy systems.
Evidence from the Paragraph:
- Mentions of Negative Impacts:
- The author refers to social and environmental harms associated with renewable energy.
- Issues like electronic waste and the ecological impact of mining for materials are highlighted.
- Tone of Caution:
- The author stresses the importance of critically examining renewable technologies.
- Phrases like "beyond their apparent benefits" suggest a nuanced perspective rather than blind endorsement.
- No Absolute Rejection:
- The author does not dismiss renewable energy, but rather calls attention to potential hidden or long-term drawbacks.
Conclusion:
The author acknowledges the potential of renewable energy but expresses concern about unintended consequences. Hence, the most accurate inference is that they have reservations about the broader impacts of renewable energy systems.
Which one of the following statements best captures the main argument of the last paragraph of the passage?
- Most forms of renewable energy are not profitable investments for institutional investors.
- Renewable energy produced at the household or neighbourhood level is more efficient than mass-produced forms of energy.
- Renewable energy systems are not democratic unless they are corporate-controlled.
- The development of the renewable energy sector is a double-edged sword.
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
Option A is incorrect because the passage acknowledges renewable technology as a thriving industry. However, it also notes that small-scale production and distribution of renewable energy may not yield substantial returns on investment.
The passage indicates that renewable energy produced at the household or neighborhood level is unlikely to yield significant profits for investors. However, it does not assert that renewable energy generated at this scale is more effective than mass-produced energy forms. Hence, Option B is inaccurate.
Option C contradicts the passage's discussion on the democratic distribution of renewable energy. As mentioned in "For some climate activists, the promise of renewables rests on their ability not only to reduce emissions but also to provide distributed, democratized access to energy... But Burke and Stephens... caution that 'renewable energy systems offer a possibility but not a certainty for more democratic energy futures."
Option D is valid because the passage delves into both the advantages and disadvantages of renewable energy. As evidenced by "Both the direct and indirect impacts of renewable energy must be examined to ensure that a climate-smart future does not intensify social and environmental harm," the passage supports this notion.
The correct answer is (D): The development of the renewable energy sector is a double-edged sword.
Top Questions on Reading Comprehension
- Shown below are letters ‘e’ taken from four popular logos, arranged in a sequence. Which of the options is the correct sequence?
- UCEED - 2026
- English Language Comprehension
- Reading Comprehension
- Shown below are four options, each showing consecutive frames representing the movement of a pendulum of an old-style wall clock for an animation movie. Which is the correct option?
- UCEED - 2026
- English Language Comprehension
- Reading Comprehension
- Acrucial moderating factor in how people experience comparisons is self-esteem. Individuals with high self-esteem are more likely to interpret upward comparison as informative rather than threatening. They are more resilient in the face of others’ success and more likely to believe they can reach their own goals. In contrast, people with low self-esteem are more prone to interpret comparison as judgment, reinforcing negative self-views and triggering feelings of inadequacy.
This dynamic creates a self-reinforcing loop. People with high self-esteem are less vulnerable to upward comparison, which intensifies those doubts. Those with a secure sense of self are more likely to use comparison as a learning tool. The same external stimulus—a colleague’s achievements, a friend’s popularity—can have radically different effects depending on internal stability.
Self-esteem also influences how people choose their comparison targets. Research has found that individuals often engage in “selective comparison,” seeking out those who confirm their existing beliefs about themselves. This can become a subtle form of self-sabotage. Someone who feels unworthy may subconsciously seek out targets that reinforce that sense, perpetuating a narrative of inferiority. One of the most promising antidotes to social comparison is temporal comparison—evaluating oneself not against others, but against one’s own past. This method has been shown to increase motivation and satisfaction, especially when individuals can see concrete progress. Temporal comparison activates the same reward circuits as social comparison but avoids the threat systems associated with social ranking. It also reinforces agency: individuals focus on what they can control and improve rather than what others control. In therapeutic and coaching settings, temporal comparison is used to help clients build self-efficacy and track growth over time.
Moreover, people who focus on self-improvement rather than social dominance are less likely to fall into cycles of envy or self-pity. They can still use others as inspiration, but they do so without attaching their self-worth to the outcome. This is not to say they never compare—but that they focus on learning, rather than judgment. The most skilful approach to comparison may lie in eliminating it, but in reframing it as feedback. When we interpret comparison as information rather than a verdict, we can ask, “What can I learn from this?” This shift turns comparison into a growth tool. Teachers mentor their students, not as rivals. Psychologists emphasize that the key variable here is mindset.
A fixed mindset sees comparison as a threat. If someone else is better, it means we are worse. A growth mindset sees comparison as a map. If someone else has reached a certain level, it means the path exists. This reframing is not just a cognitive trick. It changes the emotional tone of comparison, making it more likely to inspire than to wound. Reframing also requires emotional regulation—the ability to notice an initial pang of envy or shame without reacting impulsively. With practice, individuals can learn to pause, reflect, and reinterpret their emotional responses. Over time, this builds resilience and self-trust, allowing comparison to become a learning tool rather than a cage.- XAT - 2026
- Verbal and Logical Ability
- Reading Comprehension
When people who are talking don’t share the same culture, knowledge, values, and assumptions, mutual understanding can be especially difficult. Such understanding is possible through the negotiation of meaning. To negotiate meaning with someone, you have to become aware of and respect both the differences in your backgrounds and when these differences are important. You need enough diversity of cultural and personal experience to be aware that divergent world views exist and what they might be like. You also need the flexibility in world view, and a generous tolerance for mistakes, as well as a talent for finding the right metaphor to communicate the relevant parts of unshared experiences or to highlight the shared experiences while demphasizing the others. Metaphorical imagination is a crucial skill in creating rapport and in communicating the nature of unshared experience. This skill consists, in large measure, of the ability to bend your world view and adjust the way you categorize your experiences. Problems of mutual understanding are not exotic; they arise in all extended conversations where understanding is important.
When it really counts, meaning is almost never communicated according to the CONDUIT metaphor, that is, where one person transmits a fixed, clear proposition to another by means of expressions in a common language, where both parties have all the relevant common knowledge, assumptions, values, etc. When the chips are down, meaning is negotiated: you slowly figure out what you have in common, what it is safe to talk about, how you can communicate unshared experience or create a shared vision. With enough flexibility in bending your world view and with luck and charity, you may achieve some mutual understanding.
Communication theories based on the CONDUIT metaphor turn from the pathetic to the evil when they are applied indiscriminately on a large scale, say, in government surveillance or computerized files. There, what is most crucial for real understanding is almost never included, and it is assumed that the words in the file have meaning in themselves—disembodied, objective, understandable meaning. When a society lives by the CONDUITmetaphor on a large scale, misunderstanding, persecution, and much worse are the likely products.- XAT - 2026
- Verbal and Logical Ability
- Reading Comprehension
Later, I realized that reviewing the history of nuclear physics served another purpose as well: It gave the lie to the naive belief that the physicists could have come together when nuclear fission was discovered (in Nazi Germany!) and agreed to keep the discovery a secret, thereby sparing humanity such a burden. No. Given the development of nuclear physics up to 1938, development that physicists throughout the world pursued in all innocence of any intention of finding the engine of a new weapon of mass destruction—only one of them, the remarkable Hungarian physicist Leo Szilard, took that possibility seriously—the discovery of nuclear fission was inevitable. To stop it, you would have had to stop physics. If German scientists hadn’t made the discovery when they did, French, American, Russian, Italian, or Danish scientists would have done so, almost certainly within days or weeks. They were all working at the same cutting edge, trying to understand the strange results of a simple experiment bombarding uranium with neutrons. Here was no Faustian bargain, as movie directors and other naifs still find it intellectually challenging to imagine. Here was no evil machinery that the noble scientists might hide from the problems and the generals. To the contrary, there was a high insight into how the world works, an energetic reaction, older than the earth, that science had finally devised the instruments and arrangements to coart forth. “Make it seem inevitable,” Louis Pasteur used to advise his students when they prepared to write up their discoveries. But it was. To wish that it might have been ignored or suppressed is barbarous. “Knowledge,” Niels Bohr once noted, “is itself the basis for civilization.” You cannot have the one without the other; the one depends upon the other. Nor can you have only benevolent knowledge; the scientific method doesn’t filter for benevolence. Knowledge has consequences, not always intended, not always comfortable, but always welcome. The earth revolves around the sun, not the sun around the earth. “It is a profound and necessary truth,” Robert Oppenheimer would say, “that the deep things in science are not found because they are useful; they are found because it was possible to find them.”
...Bohr proposed once that the goal of science is not universal truth. Rather, he argued, the modest but relentless goal of science is “the gradual removal of prejudices.” The discovery that the earth revolves around the sun has gradually removed the prejudice that the earth is the center of the universe. The discovery of microbes is gradually removing the prejudice that disease is a punishment from God. The discovery of evolution is gradually removing the prejudice that Homo sapiens is a separate and special creation.- XAT - 2026
- Verbal and Logical Ability
- Reading Comprehension
Questions Asked in CAT exam
- The passage given below is followed by four summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.
In the dynamic realm of creativity, artists often find themselves at the crossroads between drawing inspiration from diverse cultures and inadvertently crossing into the territory of cultural appropriation. Inspiration is the lifeblood of creativity, driving artists to create works that resonate across borders. In a globalized era of the modern world, artists draw from a vast array of cultural influences. When approached respectfully, inspiration becomes a bridge, fostering understanding and appreciation of cultural diversity. However, the line between inspiration and cultural appropriation can be thin and easily blurred.
Cultural appropriation occurs when elements from a particular culture are borrowed without proper understanding, respect, or acknowledgment. This leads to the commodification of sacred symbols, the reinforcement of stereotypes, and the erasure of the cultural context from which these elements originated. It is essential to recognize that the impact of cultural appropriation extends beyond the realm of artistic expression, influencing societal perceptions and perpetuating power imbalances.- CAT - 2025
- Para Summary
- The number of distinct integers $n$ for which $\log_{\left(\frac14\right)}(n^2 - 7n + 11)>0$ is:
- CAT - 2025
- Linear Inequalities
- In the set of consecutive odd numbers $\{1, 3, 5, \ldots, 57\}$, there is a number $k$ such that the sum of all the elements less than $k$ is equal to the sum of all the elements greater than $k$. Then, $k$ equals?
- CAT - 2025
- Number Systems
- The number of distinct pairs of integers $(x, y)$ satisfying the inequalities $x>y \ge 3$ and $x + y<14$ is:
- CAT - 2025
- Number Systems
For any natural number $k$, let $a_k = 3^k$. The smallest natural number $m$ for which \[ (a_1)^1 \times (a_2)^2 \times \dots \times (a_{20})^{20} \;<\; a_{21} \times a_{22} \times \dots \times a_{20+m} \] is:
- CAT - 2025
- Linear Inequalities