2023 CSAT — Q11

Locate. This asks for the author’s view: find the line the author drives home. The passage: today’s emissions shape mid-century climate; technology “could make a future transition… cheap or it might not,” leaving “a terrible choice”; “Businesses that do not hedge against the threat of uncertain outcomes fail. The world cannot afford such recklessness on climate change.” The committed message is an indictment of recklessness — counting on uncertain future technology instead of acting now.

Test (commitment test + scope-fit). (c) “waiting to deal with carbon emissions until technology improves is not a wise strategy” restates “the world cannot afford such recklessness” given that tech “might not” save us. The author is committed to this by the closing assertion. Test others: (b) “technology is the only solution” reverses the passage — the passage warns that relying on uncertain technology is reckless; (a) is a true-ish but narrow literal echo of one sentence; (d) prescribes “new industries on renewables,” a specific policy never stated.

Eliminate by anatomy. (b) gets the direction backwards and over-states it — it makes technology the salvation the passage is warning against leaning on, and “only” overclaims. (a) is half right, half wrong and offers a supporting detail as if it were the main point — it lifts “businesses… fail” into a literal prediction, missing the message about recklessness. (d) is a claim the passage never makes — renewable-based new industry is a remedy the passage never proposes. The transferable rule on author-view questions: the crucial message is the author’s warning/verdict (“recklessness”), not a sub-clause or a remedy the reader supplies. Key: (c).

“Technological change… could make a future transition away from fossil fuels cheap or it might not… Businesses that do not hedge against the threat of uncertain outcomes fail. The world cannot afford such recklessness on climate change.” The crucial message: because future tech is uncertain, NOT acting on emissions now (waiting for technology) is reckless and unwise — exactly (c). (b) asserts technology is “the only solution” (over-strong, reversed); (a) is a narrow literal reading; (d) prescribes a specific industry policy the passage never gives → (c).

The passage’s logic: emissions now lock in future climate; technology may or may not rescue us; failing to hedge against uncertainty is how businesses fail; “the world cannot afford such recklessness on climate change.” The verdict is that waiting on uncertain technology is reckless.

(c) states exactly that — waiting until technology improves is unwise. (b) inverts it by making technology “the only solution,” when the passage warns against banking on uncertain tech. (a) reads one sentence literally without the message. (d) invents a renewables-industry prescription.

Answer: (c).

The author uses technology as a risk, not a promise — “cheap or it might not.” The trap option (b) flips that into technology as the solution, which is the precise opposite of “the world cannot afford such recklessness.” The crucial message is the warning against complacent waiting (c). Reading the author’s stance toward technology — uncertain, not redemptive — is what separates (c) from (b). (c).