Loading question...
You are in free guest mode. Timed Practice Revision List Attempt History Progress Tracking Create a free account to unlock these tools
Prev Next
Practice Reading: Multiple Choice, Multiple Answers ID: #36000 Demobilisation
Instructions ›
Read the text and answer the question by selecting all the correct responses. You will need to select more than one response.
Researchers in the fossil fuel industry are endeavouring to produce a new hydrocarbon superfuel which they maintain would lead to a 5% increased efficiency in car engines, resulting in a reduction of 1.8 million tonnes of CO2 emissions. They claim this would have a comparable effect to swapping one million new cars for battery operated ones. But while environmentalists are typically sceptical about such claims, electric cars are not yet a panacea. It is naïve to dismiss the scale of the challenges presented by the push to go electric as a mere lack of collective will. Demobilisation of the entire global fleet of some 1.3 billion vehicles would take 15 years according to industry analysts. And the infrastructure to support advanced battery technology would need to be scaled up far beyond current capabilities. And of course, one point that is often overlooked, the environmental gains would only be fully achieved if wind or solar generated electricity was used to power electric vehicles.

What is the writer’s attitude to efforts to decarbonise the car industry?

* Click on the correct answers

Result:

AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Option 2: "She thinks people are underestimating the difficulties that need to be overcome in order to develop a carbon-neutral car industry."

Explanation: The writer highlights significant challenges in decarbonising the car industry, such as the time required to demobilise the global fleet and the need for extensive infrastructure improvements. This indicates her belief that many people underestimate these difficulties, aligning with the option's assertion.

Option 1: "She is taken aback by environmentalists who are negative about alternatives to electric cars."

Explanation: This option misrepresents the writer's attitude. The text indicates that while environmentalists are sceptical, the writer does not express being taken aback by their negativity. Instead, she acknowledges their concerns and emphasizes the complexities involved in transitioning to electric vehicles.

Option 3: "She is convinced the possibility of developing a new superfuel is doomed to failure."

Explanation: This option inaccurately reflects the writer's perspective. The text does not suggest that she believes the superfuel development is doomed; rather, it presents the potential benefits while also acknowledging the scepticism surrounding such claims.

Option 4: "She is not inclined to give claims made by industry experts the benefit of the doubt."

Explanation: The writer does not explicitly reject the claims made by industry experts; instead, she presents a balanced view that includes both the potential benefits of the new superfuel and the challenges of transitioning to electric vehicles. Thus, this option does not accurately capture her attitude.

Option 5: "She rejects the view that the main barrier to producing millions of electric cars worldwide is an absence of resolve."

Explanation: The writer argues against the simplistic notion that a lack of collective will is the primary barrier to producing electric cars. She emphasizes the substantial logistical and infrastructural challenges, indicating her rejection of this view, which aligns with the option's claim.

The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.

Sign in to read the full explanation

With a free account: Retry and compare every attempt.
Be the first! No community answers here yet. Submit yours and help others learn.
How difficult was this question?
Others found: 100% Easy · 0% Medium · 0% Hard
Saving...