send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
Type your modal answer and submitt for approval
Read the passage below and answer the following questions. The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, signed in 1987 by more than 150 nations, has attained its short-term goals: it has decreased the rate of increase in amounts of most ozone-depleting chemicals reaching the atmosphere and has even reduced the atmospheric levels of some of them. The projection that the ozone layer will substantially recover from ozone depletion by 2050 is based on the assumption that the protocol’s regulations will be strictly followed. Yet there is considerable evidence of violations, particularly in the form of the release of ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons (CFC’s), which are commonly used in the refrigeration, heating, and air conditioning industries. These violations reflect industry attitudes; for example, in the United States, 48 percents of respondents in a recent survey of subscribers to Air Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration News, an industry trade journal, said that they did not believe that CFC’s damage the ozone layer. Moreover, some in the industry apparently do not want to pay for CFC substitutes, which can run five times the cost of CFC’s. Consequently, a black market in imported illicit CFC’s has grown. Estimates of the contraband CFC trade range from 10,000 to 22,000 tons a year, with most of the CFC’s originating in India and China, whose agreements under the Protocol still allow them to produce CFC’s. In fact, the United States Customs Service reports that CFC-12 is a contraband problem second only to illicit drugs.
The passage suggests which of the following about the illicit trade in CFC’s?
It would cease if manufacturers in India and China stopped producing CFC’s.
Most people who participate in such trade do not believe that CFC’s deplete the ozone layer.
It will probably surpass illicit drugs as the largest contraband problem faced by the United States Custom Services.
It is fostered by people who do not want to pay the price of CFC substitutes.
- The illicit trade in CFCs is partially due to the high cost of CFC substitutes. The passage mentions that many in the industry are unwilling to pay up to five times more for these substitutes.
- The trade is not solely dependent on manufacturers in India and China stopping production. Even if production halted, current stock and other factors could sustain the trade.
- While there are some industry respondents who do not believe CFCs harm the ozone, the passage does not confirm that most people in the illicit trade hold this belief.
- The illicit CFC trade is significant but not indicated as surpassing drugs as the top contraband issue.
Option: 4 - It is fostered by people who do not want to pay the price of CFC substitutes.
By: Munesh Kumari ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources
New Courses