Question

Which of the following is the author most likely to agree with?

• A. People in the US are not worried at all about climate change.
• B. People in the US are worried about climate change, and these concerns affect their energy consumption habits more than anything else.
• C. Climate change has resulted in the increase of energy prices across the world, and as a result, governments have had to invest in finding newer sources of renewable energy.
• D. Changes in the energy consumption habits of people in the US are affected more by energy prices than concerns of climate change.
• A. Developed countries should not, under any circumstances, invest any resources in fossil fuel energy extraction, and must immediately put a halt to all fossil fuel consumption.
• B. Things could improve if developed countries recognise the difficulty of moving away from reliance on such sources of energy and make a conscious effort to move to alternate or renewable energy sources quickly.
• C. Since investments in energy extraction of any kind are very expensive, developed countries must ensure that their needs are met before continuing investments in fossil fuels.
• D. Developing countries must not, under any circumstances, be allowed to make claims on whatever carbon budget space remains.
• A. The fossil fuel industry in developing countries will face reduced sales in the short term, with increased sales in the long term.
• B. The cost of making, installing, and using solar panels will reduce substantially in the coming years.
• C. Passing a bill in the US is a huge effort, and it would not have been possible to pass the new climate bill unless the current energy crisis had compelled lawmakers to do so.
• D. The fossil fuel industry in developing countries will see an increase in business, at least in the short term.
• A. People like to travel regardless of season, and the only thing that would prevent them from travelling at any time of the year would be high costs.
• B. Airlines raised ticket prices as a response to increase in fuel prices, and therefore, fewer people were able to buy air tickets to travel.
• C. Strict lockdowns were imposed in the US in summer, because of which people travelled less; further, temperatures were moderate, and this meant people had to use less fuel to heat or warm their homes.
• D. Widespread geopolitical tensions in the first half of the year meant that fuel prices were at an all-time high in summer; but prices have now eased off somewhat, making fuel slightly more affordable in the US.
• A. The development of adequate renewable power sources in the near term that would lead to a reduction in consumption of fossil fuels.
• B. Finding new sources of fossil fuels that will ensure there is no shortage of energy to heat homes in the winter.
• C. Switching immediately to renewable power sources, even if it leads to a shortage in energy supply for people.
• D. Providing adequate aid to poorer countries so that they can develop renewable power sources for their use.
• A. The bill invests huge amounts in renewable energy but does not provide for enough increase in investments in developing more sources of fossil fuel-powered energy.
• B. The bill is written in technical language, which ordinary people cannot easily understand.
• C. The bill is self-defeating, since it makes investments in renewable energy conditional to more expenditure on oil and gas and making millions of acres of federal land available for drilling, which would lead to an increased consumption of fossil fuels.
• D. The bill does not provide for mechanisms for shrinking carbon budgets, thereby increasing the carbon budget space remaining.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is D

Step 1: Identify the author’s observation on US consumers
The passage notes that while US citizens are worried about climate change, their immediate behaviour is more influenced by high energy prices.
An example given: prices went up so much in summer that people travelled less and used less energy to heat homes.
Step 2: Interpreting the cause-effect relationship
This shows that short-term economic concerns (prices) dominate over long-term environmental concerns in shaping consumption habits.
The concern for climate change exists, but it is not the primary driver of change in energy use.
Step 3: Eliminating wrong options
(A) is incorrect — the passage acknowledges climate change concern exists.
(B) is incorrect — it overstates climate change’s role in changing habits.
(C) focuses on global government investment trends, not US consumer habits.
\[ \boxed{\text{US consumption changes are more price-driven than climate-driven.}} \]

Answer 2

Step 1: Author’s actual stance
The author allows that there is renewed interest in fossil fuels due to the energy crisis, but stresses it must be temporary and coupled with a shift toward renewable energy.
She acknowledges that infrastructure investment makes it harder to move away from fossil fuels, but insists they must do so as quickly as possible.
Step 2: Evaluating option fit
(B) matches this — it recognises the challenge while urging a fast transition to renewables.
(A) is too absolute — the author does not forbid any investment but insists it should be temporary.
(C) prioritises developed countries’ needs without the climate responsibility the author demands.
(D) misrepresents the fairness argument — the author says developed countries must leave more carbon space for poorer countries, not deny them entirely.
\[ \boxed{\text{Temporary fossil fuel use + urgency to shift to renewables = Author's stance.}} \]

Answer 3

Step 1: Information from the passage
The passage states that the US passed a climate bill conditional on certain fossil fuel provisions, driven by the current energy crisis.
It implies that without this urgent situation, such legislation would have been politically difficult.
Step 2: Necessarily true inference
The bill’s passage is presented as directly connected to the crisis, meaning the crisis was a necessary factor.
Therefore, in the absence of the crisis, the bill likely wouldn’t have passed.
Step 3: Eliminating wrong options
(A) and (D) talk about developing countries’ fossil fuel industry — not discussed as a certainty in the passage.
(B) about solar panel cost reduction is never mentioned.
\[ \boxed{\text{The crisis was essential for the US climate bill's passage.}} \]

Answer 4

Step 1: Author’s original claim
The author attributes reduced travel and fuel use to high fuel prices, which made travel and heating expensive.
Step 2: How to weaken this
If the reduction in travel and heating use was actually due to lockdowns and mild weather, then prices weren’t the main cause.
This shifts the reason from economic to external non-price factors, directly undermining the author’s argument.
Step 3: Option analysis
(A) supports the price argument.
(B) is related to prices and does not undermine the author’s cause-effect link.
(D) talks about later fuel price changes, irrelevant to the summer reduction cause.
\[ \boxed{\text{Lockdowns + mild weather shift the cause away from high fuel prices.}} \]

Answer 5

Step 1: Nature of the ‘conundrum’
Developed countries need energy security (especially in winter) but must also cut fossil fuel use to meet climate goals and leave carbon budget space for poorer countries.
Step 2: Resolution requirement
Any solution must both supply sufficient energy and reduce reliance on fossil fuels.
Step 3: Option check
(A) satisfies both conditions — renewable capacity meets energy needs while cutting fossil fuel dependence.
(B) meets energy needs but worsens fossil fuel dependence.
(C) risks shortages, politically and socially difficult.
(D) addresses poorer countries’ needs but doesn’t solve developed countries’ energy-climate balance.
\[ \boxed{\text{Adequate renewable energy solves both energy security and climate goals.}} \]

Answer 6

Step 1: Stated aim
Reduce fossil fuel consumption.
Step 2: Contradictory provision in the bill
The passage says the bill will invest in renewables but only on condition of increasing spending on oil and gas, plus opening more land for drilling.
This would actually increase fossil fuel supply and potentially consumption.
Step 3: Why (C) is strongest
It shows a direct contradiction between the bill’s stated goal and its likely outcome, making it the strongest argument against effectiveness.
(A) is irrelevant — not increasing fossil fuels is not the goal; decreasing them is.
(B) is about comprehension, not effectiveness.
(D) is vague about mechanisms but not as directly damaging as (C).
\[ \boxed{\text{Conditional fossil fuel expansion undermines reduction goals.}} \]