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 following passage and answer the following questions.
Barring the arrival of dramatic new carbon-sucking technologies, which are so far from scalability at present that they are best described as fantasies of industrial absolution, it will not be possible to keep warming below two degrees Celsius - the level the new report describes as a climate catastrophe. As a planet, we are coursing along a trajectory that brings us north of four degrees by the end of the century. The IPCC is right that two degrees marks a world of climate catastrophe. Four degrees is twice as bad as that. And that is where we are headed, at present - a climate hell twice as hellish as the one the IPCC says, rightly, we must avoid at all costs. But the real meaning of the report is not “climate change is much worse than you think,” because anyone who knows the state of the research will find nothing surprising in it. The real meaning is, “you now have permission to freak out.”
What is the most relevant aim of the author of this passage?
To make readers aware of delay in pragmatic availability and scalability of carbon- sequestering technologies.
To make policy makers aware of the urgency required in climate change mitigation steps.
To make common people aware of the inevitable climate catastrophe so that climate mitigation becomes a participative process.
To scare people living in low- lying areas of the world about climate catastrophe and consequent inundation of coastal areas.
The passage addresses a problem in simple and jargon free language, thus making it understandable for a layman to grasp the gist. The tone of the passage is narrative and seems someone is narrating a problem as the phraseology of the first paragraph shows so. Further the author simplifies the report by IPCC in an congenial language and shortens the gist in a playful maxim. Thus we know that the passage is written for common people to start thinking over and participating in the ventures against climate change. Thus (c) is the answer. Although the passage starts with allusion to the concept that presently the carbon sucking technologies that will hinder the temperature from rising above two degree Celsius are unscalable today, the rest of the passage aims to bring forth the present condition about the climate change before the readers. It later even simplifies the report. Thus (a) is not the answer. The passage mentions that anyone who knows the state of research will not be surprised. This means the passage tends to inkle that policy makers will not be surprised. Thus the passage does not target the policy makers nor does reveal anything to them. Thus (b) is not the answer. The option (d) is entirely ‘extraneous’ to the passage. Option (d) could have been the extension but no information mentioned in (d) is available in the passage.
Hence, the correct answer is option (c).
By: Kritika Kaushal ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources
New Courses