Skip to main contentSkip to solution

The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.

For each of the past three years, temperatures have hit peaks not seen since the birth of meteorology, and probably not for more than 110,000 years. The amount of carbon dioxide in the air is at its highest level in 4 million years. This does not cause storms like Harvey, there have always been storms and hurricanes along the Gulf of Mexico but it makes them wetter and more powerful. As the seas warm, they evaporate more easily and provide energy to storm fronts. As the air above them warms, it holds more water vapour. For every half a degree Celsius in warming, there is about a 3% increase in atmospheric moisture content. Scientists call this the Clausius Clapeyron equation. This means the skies fill more quickly and have more to dump. The storm surge was greater because sea levels have risen 20 cm as a result of more than 100 years of human related global warming which has melted glaciers and thermally expanded the volume of sea water.

Solution

βœ… Correct Option: 3

The passage explains how global warming makes storms like Harvey more dangerous.

From passage: "This does not cause storms like Harvey, there have always been storms and hurricanes along the Gulf of Mexico but it makes them wetter and more powerful."

The key insight -> Global warming doesn't create storms, but it supercharges them through two main ways:

  1. Warmer seas give more energy to storms
  2. Warmer air holds more water (3% more moisture per half-degree warming)
  3. Higher sea levels make storm surges worse

Now let's eliminate the wrong options:

πŸ”΄ Option 1 -> contradicts passage -> says global warming and Harvey are "unrelated" when the whole passage explains how they ARE related through moisture and sea levels

🟠 Option 2 -> partial-truth + adds info not given -> correctly says global warming makes storms destructive, but then talks about "scale of damage" predictions which the passage never discusses

🟠 Option 4 -> adds uncertainty not in passage -> starts well but ends with "this may not be true of all storms" - the passage doesn't express any such doubt about the connection

🟒 Option 3 -> captures the complete mechanism -> mentions glacier melting (βœ“), sea water expansion (βœ“), more water vapor filling air faster (βœ“), and storms having more destructive energy (βœ“) - all directly from the passage without adding doubts or limitations

From passage: "The storm surge was greater because sea levels have risen 20 cm as a result of more than 100 years of human related global warming which has melted glaciers and thermally expanded the volume of sea water."

Option 3 perfectly captures this cause-and-effect chain without getting sidetracked or adding information not in the passage.

Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Left arrow: Previous question
  • Right arrow: Next question
  • S key: Jump to solution
  • Q key: Jump to question