Reading Comprehension For SBI PO Mains: Part 7

Enough countries ratified the deal on global warming reached in Paris in December 2015—aiming to keep the increase on pre-industrial temperatures to “well below” 2°C —for it formally to come into effect in November 2016. The world’s governments are starting to act on their pollution-cutting pledges. But two big questions loom large in 2017.
One is the fate of the Paris Agreement under Donald Trump. The president-elect has claimed that global warming is a hoax intended to frustrate American businesses. He will seek to thwart the Clean Power Plan, which sets national standards to limit carbon-dioxide emissions from power plants, and withdraw from the Paris deal itself. However, none of his options is easy. Now that the agreement has entered into force, the country is bound to it for four years. A Trump administration could stymie related environmental efforts, but that would alienate China, among others. The plummeting price of solar and wind power may anyway test Mr Trump’s love of coal. And powerful states, such as California, will lead green endeavours where federal ones fall short.
The second question is whether businesses get serious about curbing their emissions. To stand a chance of limiting the world to warming of less than 2°C, net zero emissions must be reached around the middle of the century. Yet, when totted up, national pledges to curb pollution under the Paris deal will only keep warming to around 3°C. Firms must help bridge the gap.
In many cases they can make money from going greener. Over the decade to 2015 Walmart, the world’s biggest retailer, saved as much as $1 billion annually by changing the routes of its American vehicle fleet, which doubled its efficiency. And their reputations are at risk. In recent years Lego, a maker of toy bricks, has been lambasted for its relationship with the oil industry, and snack giants such as Nestlé have come under attack for the deforestation caused by palm-oil plantations.
But how serious will businesses’ efforts be? In Mr Trump’s America, the pressure may be off. And in the wider corporate world “sustainability” has too often been jargon for activities designed to fob off environmentalists.
Confusion over measurement has not helped: firms lack an agreed means of reporting their impact on the planet. Many ways exist to quantify water use, chemical use and emissions from buildings, products and supply chains. Comparing companies using differing standards is tricky enough. Doing so when firms hide key information can be a joke. The Dow Jones Sustainability Index deemed Volkswagen the world’s most sustainable carmaker in 2015; weeks later, news broke that 11m of the firm’s diesel vehicles had been fitted with software to cheat emissions tests.
In 2017 there should at least be fewer excuses. A taskforce on carbon disclosure will deliver recommendations to the G20 and the Financial Stability Board, a global regulators’ forum. The plan is to create a voluntary framework that will allow companies to report their exposure to climate risks consistently. Once they do so the market can go green more efficiently, armed with more information.
A new carbon-disclosure framework for firms could, therefore, spur progress on national pledges to curb emissions. Other trends could help cut waste. Talk of the “circular economy”, predicated on recycling and reusing products, is in vogue. Leasing models, for everything from cars to light bulbs, can save resources.
The Paris Agreement includes mechanisms to crank up national pledges. Fresh talks will be held in 2018 to take stock of progress; countries will then decide on new goals for themselves in 2020. Even if America has fallen back by then, dreadful air pollution in India and China means their governments cannot ignore emissions. Tree-hugging Europeans will demand further action. So, despite the temptation, in America at least, to shelter behind the new climate-change denier-in-chief in the White House, the best long-term strategy firms can pursue is one that lowers their own impact on the planet.

1. Who has been criticised for the relationship with an oil industry according to the passage?
A. Financial Stability Board
B. the oil industry
C. Volkswagen the world’s most sustainable carmaker
D. a maker of toy bricks
E. none of these

2. Which of the following is not true according to the passage?
i. The Dow Jones Sustainability Index deemed Volkswagen the world’s most sustainable carmaker in 2015; weeks later, news broke that 11m of the firm’s diesel vehicles had not been fitted with software to cheat emissions tests.
ii. To stand a chance of limiting the world to warming of less than 2°C, net zero emissions must be reached around the middle of the century.
iii. When totted up, national pledges to curb pollution under the Paris deal will only keep warming to around 3°C.

A. Only i
B. Only ii
C. Both i and ii
D. Only iii
E. Both ii and iii

3. How can the market go green more efficiently according to the passage?
A. By reusing products
B. By create a voluntary framework
C. When companies will find Many ways to quantify water use
D. When companies will find Many ways to quantify chemical use and emissions from buildings
E. None of these

4. When will countries decide their new goals according to the passage?
A. By 2018
B. By 2020
C. By 2017
D. In 2015
E. In 2020

5. Which of the following is true according to the passage?
A. A Trump administration could not stymie related environmental efforts, but that would alienate China, among others.
B. Even if America has fallen back by then, dreadful air pollution in India and Russia means their governments cannot ignore emissions.
C. Over the decade to 2015 Walmart, the world’s biggest retailer, saved as much as $1 million annually by changing the routes of its American vehicle fleet, which doubled its efficiency.
D. Many ways exist to quantify water use, chemical use and emissions from buildings, products and supply chains.
E. None of these

6. Choose the word which is MOST SIMILAR in meaning of the word printed in bold as used in the passage.
Lambasted

A. Criticized
B. Compliment
C. Protest
D. Surrender
E. All are the synonyms.

7. Choose the word which is MOST SIMILAR in meaning of the word printed in bold as used in the passage.
Hoax
A. Genuine act 
B. Native
C. Original
D. Humbug
E. None of these

8. Choose the word which is MOST OPPOSITE in meaning of the word printed in bold as used in the passage.
Pledges
A. Convert
B. Promise
C. Break
D. Assure
E. Vow

Answers with Explanations

1. Ans. D. 

Solution:
(A maker of toy bricks, has been lambasted (criticize) for its relationship with the oil industry) 

2. Ans. A. 

Solution:
(The Dow Jones Sustainability Index deemed Volkswagen the world’s most sustainable carmaker in 2015; weeks later, news broke that 11m of the firm’s diesel vehicles had been fitted with software to cheat emissions tests.) 

3. Ans. B. 

Solution:
(The plan is to create a voluntary framework that will allow companies to report their exposure to climate risks consistently. Once they do so the market can go green more efficiently,) 

4. Ans. E. 

Solution:
(Countries will then decide on new goals for themselves in 2020.) 

5. Ans. D. 

Solution:
(Many ways exist to quantify water use, chemical use and emissions from buildings, products and supply chains.) 

6. Ans. A. 

Solution:
(Lambasted - Criticized) 

7. Ans. D. 

Solution:
(Hoax- something intended to deceive
Humbug is the similar meaning of Hoax) 

8. Ans. C. 

Solution:
(Pledge's antonyms - Break)

Smart Prep Kit for Banking Exams by Ramandeep Singh - Download here


Join 40,000+ readers and get free notes in your email

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Thanks for commenting. It's very difficult to answer every query here, it's better to post your query on IBPSToday.com