GMAT Exam  >  GMAT Questions  >  Globally, about a third of the food produced ... Start Learning for Free
Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goes to waste, implying that a third of the water, land use, energy and financial resources that go into producing it are also squandered. Yet people often think of food as environmentally benign because it is biodegradable, while label food packaging as a wasteful use of resources leading to nothing but more pollution, despite the reality that the energy that goes into packaging makes up a mere 10% of the total energy that goes into producing, transporting, storing and preparing food. Needless to say, their view ignores the negative impact of food production, supply, and consumption, and the benefits possible from the right kind of food packaging.
Indeed the dislike for food packaging is not all baseless. There is a lot of bad and wasteful packaging out there. But any assessment of its impact on the environment must take into account the benefits one can derive from packaging in the shape of reduced food waste that can be realized by protecting and dispensing food properly. For instance, two percent of the milk produced in the US goes bad on supermarket shelves before it can be purchased. This dairy waste can be avoided with packaging technology such as Tetra Pak that saves milk from spoiling, even without refrigeration. However, environmentally aware consumers tend to dislike Tetra Pak material because they think it cannot be recycled. The truth, however, is that it can be recycled, but the process is rather complicated. Irrespective of the recycling aspect, Tetra Pak is a good environmental bet because it can extend the shelf life of milk up to nine months, reducing the need for refrigeration — and reducing the amount of milk that goes bad on retail shelves. Clearly, the environmental benefit of the food-protection technology outweighs the negative impact of the packaging itself.
Which of the following is the function of the first paragraph in the passage?
  • a)
    To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industry
  • b)
    To raise a few considerations against a popular belief
  • c)
    To contrast two views on a highly debated topic
  • d)
    To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environment
  • e)
    To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situation
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Verified Answer
Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goe...
Passage Analysis
Summary and Main Point
Pre-Thinking
This is a Function question. Per the paragraph summary, the first paragraph raises considerations against a popular belief. This is the function of this paragraph in the passage. Individual paragraph summary helps us arrive at the correct answer for function questions quickly.
Answer Choices
A
To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industry
Incorrect: Out of Scope
The author does mention people’s view regarding food in this paragraph but there is no cause and effect relationship drawn between this view and the mentioned wastage of resources.
B
To raise a few considerations against a popular belief
Correct
This choice matches our pre-thought answer. The reason the author shares facts about the food industry and packaging is to reason against the partial view held by the people.
C
To contrast two views on a highly debated topic
Incorrect: Out of Scope
There is no information given to conclude that any topic mentioned in the passage is “highly debated”.
D
To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environment
Incorrect: Partial scope
The author does state that a lot of resources are being wasted but this information does not form the full scope of the first paragraph. The author provides this information to show how people are not fully aware of the situation regarding the environmental impacts of food wastage and how their belief that packaging is wasteful and bad may not be always relevant.
E
To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situation
Incorrect: Out of Scope
The author awards credibility to the people’s view in the second paragraph and not the first.
View all questions of this test
Most Upvoted Answer
Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goe...
Passage Analysis
Summary and Main Point
Pre-Thinking
This is a Function question. Per the paragraph summary, the first paragraph raises considerations against a popular belief. This is the function of this paragraph in the passage. Individual paragraph summary helps us arrive at the correct answer for function questions quickly.
Answer Choices
A
To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industry
Incorrect: Out of Scope
The author does mention people’s view regarding food in this paragraph but there is no cause and effect relationship drawn between this view and the mentioned wastage of resources.
B
To raise a few considerations against a popular belief
Correct
This choice matches our pre-thought answer. The reason the author shares facts about the food industry and packaging is to reason against the partial view held by the people.
C
To contrast two views on a highly debated topic
Incorrect: Out of Scope
There is no information given to conclude that any topic mentioned in the passage is “highly debated”.
D
To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environment
Incorrect: Partial scope
The author does state that a lot of resources are being wasted but this information does not form the full scope of the first paragraph. The author provides this information to show how people are not fully aware of the situation regarding the environmental impacts of food wastage and how their belief that packaging is wasteful and bad may not be always relevant.
E
To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situation
Incorrect: Out of Scope
The author awards credibility to the people’s view in the second paragraph and not the first.
Free Test
Community Answer
Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goe...
Passage Analysis
Summary and Main Point
Pre-Thinking
This is a Function question. Per the paragraph summary, the first paragraph raises considerations against a popular belief. This is the function of this paragraph in the passage. Individual paragraph summary helps us arrive at the correct answer for function questions quickly.
Answer Choices
A
To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industry
Incorrect: Out of Scope
The author does mention people’s view regarding food in this paragraph but there is no cause and effect relationship drawn between this view and the mentioned wastage of resources.
B
To raise a few considerations against a popular belief
Correct
This choice matches our pre-thought answer. The reason the author shares facts about the food industry and packaging is to reason against the partial view held by the people.
C
To contrast two views on a highly debated topic
Incorrect: Out of Scope
There is no information given to conclude that any topic mentioned in the passage is “highly debated”.
D
To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environment
Incorrect: Partial scope
The author does state that a lot of resources are being wasted but this information does not form the full scope of the first paragraph. The author provides this information to show how people are not fully aware of the situation regarding the environmental impacts of food wastage and how their belief that packaging is wasteful and bad may not be always relevant.
E
To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situation
Incorrect: Out of Scope
The author awards credibility to the people’s view in the second paragraph and not the first.
Attention GMAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed GMAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in GMAT.
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Similar GMAT Doubts

Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goes to waste, implying that a third of the water, land use, energy and financial resources that go into producing it are also squandered. Yet people often think of food as environmentally benign because it is biodegradable, while label food packaging as a wasteful use of resources leading to nothing but more pollution, despite the reality that the energy that goes into packaging makes up a mere 10% of the total energy that goes into producing, transporting, storing and preparing food. Needless to say, their view ignores the negative impact of food production, supply, and consumption, and the benefits possible from the right kind of food packaging.Indeed the dislike for food packaging is not all baseless. There is a lot of bad and wasteful packaging out there. But any assessment of its impact on the environment must take into account the benefits one can derive from packaging in the shape of reduced food waste that can be realized by protecting and dispensing food properly. For instance, two percent of the milk produced in the US goes bad on supermarket shelves before it can be purchased. This dairy waste can be avoided with packaging technology such as Tetra Pak that saves milk from spoiling, even without refrigeration. However, environmentally aware consumers tend to dislike Tetra Pak material because they think it cannot be recycled. The truth, however, is that it can be recycled, but the process is rather complicated. Irrespective of the recycling aspect, Tetra Pak is a good environmental bet because it can extend the shelf life of milk up to nine months, reducing the need for refrigeration and reducing the amount of milk that goes bad on retail shelves. Clearly, the environmental benefit of the food-protection technology outweighs the negative impact of the packaging itself.The author is primarily concerned with

Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goes to waste, implying that a third of the water, land use, energy and financial resources that go into producing it are also squandered. Yet people often think of food as environmentally benign because it is biodegradable, while label food packaging as a wasteful use of resources leading to nothing but more pollution, despite the reality that the energy that goes into packaging makes up a mere 10% of the total energy that goes into producing, transporting, storing and preparing food. Needless to say, their view ignores the negative impact of food production, supply, and consumption, and the benefits possible from the right kind of food packaging.Indeed the dislike for food packaging is not all baseless. There is a lot of bad and wasteful packaging out there. But any assessment of its impact on the environment must take into account the benefits one can derive from packaging in the shape of reduced food waste that can be realized by protecting and dispensing food properly. For instance, two percent of the milk produced in the US goes bad on supermarket shelves before it can be purchased. This dairy waste can be avoided with packaging technology such as Tetra Pak that saves milk from spoiling, even without refrigeration. However, environmentally aware consumers tend to dislike Tetra Pak material because they think it cannot be recycled. The truth, however, is that it can be recycled, but the process is rather complicated. Irrespective of the recycling aspect, Tetra Pak is a good environmental bet because it can extend the shelf life of milk up to nine months, reducing the need for refrigeration and reducing the amount of milk that goes bad on retail shelves. Clearly, the environmental benefit of the food-protection technology outweighs the negative impact of the packaging itself.Which of the following statement can be derived from the passage?

Direction: Read the following Passage and Answer the following Question.As urban landscapes continue to expand, the rise of vertical farming is becoming a crucial element in the quest for sustainable city living. Vertical farms, which grow crops in stacked layers within a controlled environment, offer a revolutionary approach to agriculture in urban settings. This innovative method of farming is not just about saving space; its about reimagining how we produce food in the face of growing environmental challenges.One of the key advantages of vertical farming is its minimal use of water and pesticides. Unlike traditional agriculture, which relies heavily on these resources, vertical farms use hydroponic systems that circulate water efficiently and eliminate the need for soil and large-scale pesticide use. This approach significantly reduces the environmental impact of farming.Another significant benefit is the reduction in food miles. Vertical farms can be established within urban areas, drastically cutting down the distance food travels from farm to consumer. This not only ensures fresher produce but also reduces transportation emissions, contributing to lower carbon footprints.However, vertical farming faces its own set of challenges. The initial setup and operational costs can be high, making it difficult for these farms to compete with traditional agriculture in terms of cost. Additionally, the energy requirements for maintaining controlled environments, such as lighting and temperature control, are substantial. Critics argue that unless renewable energy sources power these farms, they may not be as sustainable as they seem.Despite these challenges, the potential of vertical farming in reshaping urban agriculture remains immense. As technology advances, the efficiency of these farms is expected to improve, making them a vital component in the development of sustainable cities.Q.Based on the passage, which of the following can be inferred about vertical farms compared to traditional farms?

Direction: Read the following Passage and Answer the following Question.As urban landscapes continue to expand, the rise of vertical farming is becoming a crucial element in the quest for sustainable city living. Vertical farms, which grow crops in stacked layers within a controlled environment, offer a revolutionary approach to agriculture in urban settings. This innovative method of farming is not just about saving space; its about reimagining how we produce food in the face of growing environmental challenges.One of the key advantages of vertical farming is its minimal use of water and pesticides. Unlike traditional agriculture, which relies heavily on these resources, vertical farms use hydroponic systems that circulate water efficiently and eliminate the need for soil and large-scale pesticide use. This approach significantly reduces the environmental impact of farming.Another significant benefit is the reduction in food miles. Vertical farms can be established within urban areas, drastically cutting down the distance food travels from farm to consumer. This not only ensures fresher produce but also reduces transportation emissions, contributing to lower carbon footprints.However, vertical farming faces its own set of challenges. The initial setup and operational costs can be high, making it difficult for these farms to compete with traditional agriculture in terms of cost. Additionally, the energy requirements for maintaining controlled environments, such as lighting and temperature control, are substantial. Critics argue that unless renewable energy sources power these farms, they may not be as sustainable as they seem.Despite these challenges, the potential of vertical farming in reshaping urban agriculture remains immense. As technology advances, the efficiency of these farms is expected to improve, making them a vital component in the development of sustainable cities.Q.Which of the following best summarizes the central idea of the passage?

Direction: Read the following Passage and Answer the following Question.As urban landscapes continue to expand, the rise of vertical farming is becoming a crucial element in the quest for sustainable city living. Vertical farms, which grow crops in stacked layers within a controlled environment, offer a revolutionary approach to agriculture in urban settings. This innovative method of farming is not just about saving space; its about reimagining how we produce food in the face of growing environmental challenges.One of the key advantages of vertical farming is its minimal use of water and pesticides. Unlike traditional agriculture, which relies heavily on these resources, vertical farms use hydroponic systems that circulate water efficiently and eliminate the need for soil and large-scale pesticide use. This approach significantly reduces the environmental impact of farming.Another significant benefit is the reduction in food miles. Vertical farms can be established within urban areas, drastically cutting down the distance food travels from farm to consumer. This not only ensures fresher produce but also reduces transportation emissions, contributing to lower carbon footprints.However, vertical farming faces its own set of challenges. The initial setup and operational costs can be high, making it difficult for these farms to compete with traditional agriculture in terms of cost. Additionally, the energy requirements for maintaining controlled environments, such as lighting and temperature control, are substantial. Critics argue that unless renewable energy sources power these farms, they may not be as sustainable as they seem.Despite these challenges, the potential of vertical farming in reshaping urban agriculture remains immense. As technology advances, the efficiency of these farms is expected to improve, making them a vital component in the development of sustainable cities.Q.Which of the following concerns about vertical farming is mentioned in the passage?

Top Courses for GMAT

Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goes to waste, implying that a third of the water, land use, energy and financial resources that go into producing it are also squandered. Yet people often think of food as environmentally benign because it is biodegradable, while label food packaging as a wasteful use of resources leading to nothing but more pollution, despite the reality that the energy that goes into packaging makes up a mere 10% of the total energy that goes into producing, transporting, storing and preparing food. Needless to say, their view ignores the negative impact of food production, supply, and consumption, and the benefits possible from the right kind of food packaging.Indeed the dislike for food packaging is not all baseless. There is a lot of bad and wasteful packaging out there. But any assessment of its impact on the environment must take into account the benefits one can derive from packaging in the shape of reduced food waste that can be realized by protecting and dispensing food properly. For instance, two percent of the milk produced in the US goes bad on supermarket shelves before it can be purchased. This dairy waste can be avoided with packaging technology such as Tetra Pak that saves milk from spoiling, even without refrigeration. However, environmentally aware consumers tend to dislike Tetra Pak material because they think it cannot be recycled. The truth, however, is that it can be recycled, but the process is rather complicated. Irrespective of the recycling aspect, Tetra Pak is a good environmental bet because it can extend the shelf life of milk up to nine months, reducing the need for refrigeration — and reducing the amount of milk that goes bad on retail shelves. Clearly, the environmental benefit of the food-protection technology outweighs the negative impact of the packaging itself.Which of the following is the function of the first paragraph in the passage?a)To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industryb)To raise a few considerations against a popular beliefc)To contrast two views on a highly debated topicd)To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environmente)To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goes to waste, implying that a third of the water, land use, energy and financial resources that go into producing it are also squandered. Yet people often think of food as environmentally benign because it is biodegradable, while label food packaging as a wasteful use of resources leading to nothing but more pollution, despite the reality that the energy that goes into packaging makes up a mere 10% of the total energy that goes into producing, transporting, storing and preparing food. Needless to say, their view ignores the negative impact of food production, supply, and consumption, and the benefits possible from the right kind of food packaging.Indeed the dislike for food packaging is not all baseless. There is a lot of bad and wasteful packaging out there. But any assessment of its impact on the environment must take into account the benefits one can derive from packaging in the shape of reduced food waste that can be realized by protecting and dispensing food properly. For instance, two percent of the milk produced in the US goes bad on supermarket shelves before it can be purchased. This dairy waste can be avoided with packaging technology such as Tetra Pak that saves milk from spoiling, even without refrigeration. However, environmentally aware consumers tend to dislike Tetra Pak material because they think it cannot be recycled. The truth, however, is that it can be recycled, but the process is rather complicated. Irrespective of the recycling aspect, Tetra Pak is a good environmental bet because it can extend the shelf life of milk up to nine months, reducing the need for refrigeration — and reducing the amount of milk that goes bad on retail shelves. Clearly, the environmental benefit of the food-protection technology outweighs the negative impact of the packaging itself.Which of the following is the function of the first paragraph in the passage?a)To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industryb)To raise a few considerations against a popular beliefc)To contrast two views on a highly debated topicd)To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environmente)To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2024 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goes to waste, implying that a third of the water, land use, energy and financial resources that go into producing it are also squandered. Yet people often think of food as environmentally benign because it is biodegradable, while label food packaging as a wasteful use of resources leading to nothing but more pollution, despite the reality that the energy that goes into packaging makes up a mere 10% of the total energy that goes into producing, transporting, storing and preparing food. Needless to say, their view ignores the negative impact of food production, supply, and consumption, and the benefits possible from the right kind of food packaging.Indeed the dislike for food packaging is not all baseless. There is a lot of bad and wasteful packaging out there. But any assessment of its impact on the environment must take into account the benefits one can derive from packaging in the shape of reduced food waste that can be realized by protecting and dispensing food properly. For instance, two percent of the milk produced in the US goes bad on supermarket shelves before it can be purchased. This dairy waste can be avoided with packaging technology such as Tetra Pak that saves milk from spoiling, even without refrigeration. However, environmentally aware consumers tend to dislike Tetra Pak material because they think it cannot be recycled. The truth, however, is that it can be recycled, but the process is rather complicated. Irrespective of the recycling aspect, Tetra Pak is a good environmental bet because it can extend the shelf life of milk up to nine months, reducing the need for refrigeration — and reducing the amount of milk that goes bad on retail shelves. Clearly, the environmental benefit of the food-protection technology outweighs the negative impact of the packaging itself.Which of the following is the function of the first paragraph in the passage?a)To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industryb)To raise a few considerations against a popular beliefc)To contrast two views on a highly debated topicd)To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environmente)To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goes to waste, implying that a third of the water, land use, energy and financial resources that go into producing it are also squandered. Yet people often think of food as environmentally benign because it is biodegradable, while label food packaging as a wasteful use of resources leading to nothing but more pollution, despite the reality that the energy that goes into packaging makes up a mere 10% of the total energy that goes into producing, transporting, storing and preparing food. Needless to say, their view ignores the negative impact of food production, supply, and consumption, and the benefits possible from the right kind of food packaging.Indeed the dislike for food packaging is not all baseless. There is a lot of bad and wasteful packaging out there. But any assessment of its impact on the environment must take into account the benefits one can derive from packaging in the shape of reduced food waste that can be realized by protecting and dispensing food properly. For instance, two percent of the milk produced in the US goes bad on supermarket shelves before it can be purchased. This dairy waste can be avoided with packaging technology such as Tetra Pak that saves milk from spoiling, even without refrigeration. However, environmentally aware consumers tend to dislike Tetra Pak material because they think it cannot be recycled. The truth, however, is that it can be recycled, but the process is rather complicated. Irrespective of the recycling aspect, Tetra Pak is a good environmental bet because it can extend the shelf life of milk up to nine months, reducing the need for refrigeration — and reducing the amount of milk that goes bad on retail shelves. Clearly, the environmental benefit of the food-protection technology outweighs the negative impact of the packaging itself.Which of the following is the function of the first paragraph in the passage?a)To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industryb)To raise a few considerations against a popular beliefc)To contrast two views on a highly debated topicd)To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environmente)To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goes to waste, implying that a third of the water, land use, energy and financial resources that go into producing it are also squandered. Yet people often think of food as environmentally benign because it is biodegradable, while label food packaging as a wasteful use of resources leading to nothing but more pollution, despite the reality that the energy that goes into packaging makes up a mere 10% of the total energy that goes into producing, transporting, storing and preparing food. Needless to say, their view ignores the negative impact of food production, supply, and consumption, and the benefits possible from the right kind of food packaging.Indeed the dislike for food packaging is not all baseless. There is a lot of bad and wasteful packaging out there. But any assessment of its impact on the environment must take into account the benefits one can derive from packaging in the shape of reduced food waste that can be realized by protecting and dispensing food properly. For instance, two percent of the milk produced in the US goes bad on supermarket shelves before it can be purchased. This dairy waste can be avoided with packaging technology such as Tetra Pak that saves milk from spoiling, even without refrigeration. However, environmentally aware consumers tend to dislike Tetra Pak material because they think it cannot be recycled. The truth, however, is that it can be recycled, but the process is rather complicated. Irrespective of the recycling aspect, Tetra Pak is a good environmental bet because it can extend the shelf life of milk up to nine months, reducing the need for refrigeration — and reducing the amount of milk that goes bad on retail shelves. Clearly, the environmental benefit of the food-protection technology outweighs the negative impact of the packaging itself.Which of the following is the function of the first paragraph in the passage?a)To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industryb)To raise a few considerations against a popular beliefc)To contrast two views on a highly debated topicd)To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environmente)To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goes to waste, implying that a third of the water, land use, energy and financial resources that go into producing it are also squandered. Yet people often think of food as environmentally benign because it is biodegradable, while label food packaging as a wasteful use of resources leading to nothing but more pollution, despite the reality that the energy that goes into packaging makes up a mere 10% of the total energy that goes into producing, transporting, storing and preparing food. Needless to say, their view ignores the negative impact of food production, supply, and consumption, and the benefits possible from the right kind of food packaging.Indeed the dislike for food packaging is not all baseless. There is a lot of bad and wasteful packaging out there. But any assessment of its impact on the environment must take into account the benefits one can derive from packaging in the shape of reduced food waste that can be realized by protecting and dispensing food properly. For instance, two percent of the milk produced in the US goes bad on supermarket shelves before it can be purchased. This dairy waste can be avoided with packaging technology such as Tetra Pak that saves milk from spoiling, even without refrigeration. However, environmentally aware consumers tend to dislike Tetra Pak material because they think it cannot be recycled. The truth, however, is that it can be recycled, but the process is rather complicated. Irrespective of the recycling aspect, Tetra Pak is a good environmental bet because it can extend the shelf life of milk up to nine months, reducing the need for refrigeration — and reducing the amount of milk that goes bad on retail shelves. Clearly, the environmental benefit of the food-protection technology outweighs the negative impact of the packaging itself.Which of the following is the function of the first paragraph in the passage?a)To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industryb)To raise a few considerations against a popular beliefc)To contrast two views on a highly debated topicd)To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environmente)To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goes to waste, implying that a third of the water, land use, energy and financial resources that go into producing it are also squandered. Yet people often think of food as environmentally benign because it is biodegradable, while label food packaging as a wasteful use of resources leading to nothing but more pollution, despite the reality that the energy that goes into packaging makes up a mere 10% of the total energy that goes into producing, transporting, storing and preparing food. Needless to say, their view ignores the negative impact of food production, supply, and consumption, and the benefits possible from the right kind of food packaging.Indeed the dislike for food packaging is not all baseless. There is a lot of bad and wasteful packaging out there. But any assessment of its impact on the environment must take into account the benefits one can derive from packaging in the shape of reduced food waste that can be realized by protecting and dispensing food properly. For instance, two percent of the milk produced in the US goes bad on supermarket shelves before it can be purchased. This dairy waste can be avoided with packaging technology such as Tetra Pak that saves milk from spoiling, even without refrigeration. However, environmentally aware consumers tend to dislike Tetra Pak material because they think it cannot be recycled. The truth, however, is that it can be recycled, but the process is rather complicated. Irrespective of the recycling aspect, Tetra Pak is a good environmental bet because it can extend the shelf life of milk up to nine months, reducing the need for refrigeration — and reducing the amount of milk that goes bad on retail shelves. Clearly, the environmental benefit of the food-protection technology outweighs the negative impact of the packaging itself.Which of the following is the function of the first paragraph in the passage?a)To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industryb)To raise a few considerations against a popular beliefc)To contrast two views on a highly debated topicd)To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environmente)To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goes to waste, implying that a third of the water, land use, energy and financial resources that go into producing it are also squandered. Yet people often think of food as environmentally benign because it is biodegradable, while label food packaging as a wasteful use of resources leading to nothing but more pollution, despite the reality that the energy that goes into packaging makes up a mere 10% of the total energy that goes into producing, transporting, storing and preparing food. Needless to say, their view ignores the negative impact of food production, supply, and consumption, and the benefits possible from the right kind of food packaging.Indeed the dislike for food packaging is not all baseless. There is a lot of bad and wasteful packaging out there. But any assessment of its impact on the environment must take into account the benefits one can derive from packaging in the shape of reduced food waste that can be realized by protecting and dispensing food properly. For instance, two percent of the milk produced in the US goes bad on supermarket shelves before it can be purchased. This dairy waste can be avoided with packaging technology such as Tetra Pak that saves milk from spoiling, even without refrigeration. However, environmentally aware consumers tend to dislike Tetra Pak material because they think it cannot be recycled. The truth, however, is that it can be recycled, but the process is rather complicated. Irrespective of the recycling aspect, Tetra Pak is a good environmental bet because it can extend the shelf life of milk up to nine months, reducing the need for refrigeration — and reducing the amount of milk that goes bad on retail shelves. Clearly, the environmental benefit of the food-protection technology outweighs the negative impact of the packaging itself.Which of the following is the function of the first paragraph in the passage?a)To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industryb)To raise a few considerations against a popular beliefc)To contrast two views on a highly debated topicd)To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environmente)To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goes to waste, implying that a third of the water, land use, energy and financial resources that go into producing it are also squandered. Yet people often think of food as environmentally benign because it is biodegradable, while label food packaging as a wasteful use of resources leading to nothing but more pollution, despite the reality that the energy that goes into packaging makes up a mere 10% of the total energy that goes into producing, transporting, storing and preparing food. Needless to say, their view ignores the negative impact of food production, supply, and consumption, and the benefits possible from the right kind of food packaging.Indeed the dislike for food packaging is not all baseless. There is a lot of bad and wasteful packaging out there. But any assessment of its impact on the environment must take into account the benefits one can derive from packaging in the shape of reduced food waste that can be realized by protecting and dispensing food properly. For instance, two percent of the milk produced in the US goes bad on supermarket shelves before it can be purchased. This dairy waste can be avoided with packaging technology such as Tetra Pak that saves milk from spoiling, even without refrigeration. However, environmentally aware consumers tend to dislike Tetra Pak material because they think it cannot be recycled. The truth, however, is that it can be recycled, but the process is rather complicated. Irrespective of the recycling aspect, Tetra Pak is a good environmental bet because it can extend the shelf life of milk up to nine months, reducing the need for refrigeration — and reducing the amount of milk that goes bad on retail shelves. Clearly, the environmental benefit of the food-protection technology outweighs the negative impact of the packaging itself.Which of the following is the function of the first paragraph in the passage?a)To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industryb)To raise a few considerations against a popular beliefc)To contrast two views on a highly debated topicd)To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environmente)To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Globally, about a third of the food produced for human consumption goes to waste, implying that a third of the water, land use, energy and financial resources that go into producing it are also squandered. Yet people often think of food as environmentally benign because it is biodegradable, while label food packaging as a wasteful use of resources leading to nothing but more pollution, despite the reality that the energy that goes into packaging makes up a mere 10% of the total energy that goes into producing, transporting, storing and preparing food. Needless to say, their view ignores the negative impact of food production, supply, and consumption, and the benefits possible from the right kind of food packaging.Indeed the dislike for food packaging is not all baseless. There is a lot of bad and wasteful packaging out there. But any assessment of its impact on the environment must take into account the benefits one can derive from packaging in the shape of reduced food waste that can be realized by protecting and dispensing food properly. For instance, two percent of the milk produced in the US goes bad on supermarket shelves before it can be purchased. This dairy waste can be avoided with packaging technology such as Tetra Pak that saves milk from spoiling, even without refrigeration. However, environmentally aware consumers tend to dislike Tetra Pak material because they think it cannot be recycled. The truth, however, is that it can be recycled, but the process is rather complicated. Irrespective of the recycling aspect, Tetra Pak is a good environmental bet because it can extend the shelf life of milk up to nine months, reducing the need for refrigeration — and reducing the amount of milk that goes bad on retail shelves. Clearly, the environmental benefit of the food-protection technology outweighs the negative impact of the packaging itself.Which of the following is the function of the first paragraph in the passage?a)To introduce a view that is responsible for a significant proportion of wastage in an industryb)To raise a few considerations against a popular beliefc)To contrast two views on a highly debated topicd)To state a situation that has severe damaging effects on the environmente)To highlight that a popular belief, although credible sometimes, does not take in to account the full situationCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Top Courses for GMAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev