CAT Exam  >  CAT Questions  >  Scientists recently declared that the evidenc... Start Learning for Free
Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanity’s impact on the Earth’s atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.
Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EU’s competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UK’s environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.
In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UK’s recycling rate had reached 45%.
The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.
The Tories have talked green but acted blue.
The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. And as a member, UK has more influence globally. UK’s voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.
 
Q. What could the Tories have done to make the author comment “they talked green but acted blue”?
I. They tried to sell off England’s forests.
II. They increased solar subsidies.
III. They scrapped support for wind farm subsidies.
IV. They focused on investing in low-carbon projects.
  • a)
    Only II 
  • b)
    Both I & III
  • c)
    Both II &IV
  • d)
    Any of these
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Verified Answer
Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to...
In the context of the passage, ‘talked green but acted blue’ would mean that the Tories talked about being eco-friendly but weren't. Statements II and IV are eco-friendly actions. So, logically, only I and III can be correct since they would indicate that the Tories were not sticking to their eco-friendly stance.
Hence, the correct answer is option 2.
View all questions of this test
Most Upvoted Answer
Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to...
Understanding the Statement: "Talked Green but Acted Blue"
The phrase "talked green but acted blue" implies that the Tories (Conservative Party) may have publicly supported environmental initiatives but failed to follow through with substantial actions. Let’s analyze the provided options to understand why "Both I and III" are the correct choices.
Examining the Options
- I. They tried to sell off England's forests.
- This action indicates a lack of commitment to protecting natural resources, which contradicts a "green" agenda. Selling forests would be perceived as prioritizing profit over environmental sustainability.
- II. They increased solar subsidies.
- Increasing subsidies for solar energy would represent a positive action towards renewable energy and environmental protection, aligning with a "green" initiative. This option does not support the idea of "acting blue."
- III. They scrapped support for wind farm subsidies.
- Scrapping support for wind farms directly undermines renewable energy initiatives. This action reinforces the notion of the Tories' inconsistency in environmental policy, aligning with "acting blue."
- IV. They focused on investing in low-carbon projects.
- Similar to option II, investing in low-carbon projects showcases a commitment to sustainability. Thus, this option contradicts the idea that they "acted blue."
Conclusion
The combination of options I and III illustrates the inconsistency in environmental policy. While the Tories may have made green claims, actions such as attempting to sell off forests and cutting wind farm subsidies reveal a lack of genuine commitment to environmental sustainability. Therefore, the correct answer is "Both I and III."
Attention CAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CAT.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.The tone of the author can best be said to be ______.

Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.What is the primary purpose of the author?

Group QuestionAnswer the questions based on the passage given below.Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.Which of the following is true in regard to UKs exit from the EU?

Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.Paragraph 1 talks about humanitys impact in pushing the word ina new era. Which word best describes this time period?

Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.What are the problems that the EU has not helped UK tackle?

Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.What could the Tories have done to make the author comment they talked green but acted blue?I. They tried to sell off Englands forests.II. They increased solar subsidies.III. They scrapped support for wind farm subsidies.IV. They focused on investing in low-carbon projects.a)Only IIb)Both I IIIc)Both II IVd)Any of theseCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.What could the Tories have done to make the author comment they talked green but acted blue?I. They tried to sell off Englands forests.II. They increased solar subsidies.III. They scrapped support for wind farm subsidies.IV. They focused on investing in low-carbon projects.a)Only IIb)Both I IIIc)Both II IVd)Any of theseCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2024 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.What could the Tories have done to make the author comment they talked green but acted blue?I. They tried to sell off Englands forests.II. They increased solar subsidies.III. They scrapped support for wind farm subsidies.IV. They focused on investing in low-carbon projects.a)Only IIb)Both I IIIc)Both II IVd)Any of theseCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.What could the Tories have done to make the author comment they talked green but acted blue?I. They tried to sell off Englands forests.II. They increased solar subsidies.III. They scrapped support for wind farm subsidies.IV. They focused on investing in low-carbon projects.a)Only IIb)Both I IIIc)Both II IVd)Any of theseCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.What could the Tories have done to make the author comment they talked green but acted blue?I. They tried to sell off Englands forests.II. They increased solar subsidies.III. They scrapped support for wind farm subsidies.IV. They focused on investing in low-carbon projects.a)Only IIb)Both I IIIc)Both II IVd)Any of theseCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.What could the Tories have done to make the author comment they talked green but acted blue?I. They tried to sell off Englands forests.II. They increased solar subsidies.III. They scrapped support for wind farm subsidies.IV. They focused on investing in low-carbon projects.a)Only IIb)Both I IIIc)Both II IVd)Any of theseCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.What could the Tories have done to make the author comment they talked green but acted blue?I. They tried to sell off Englands forests.II. They increased solar subsidies.III. They scrapped support for wind farm subsidies.IV. They focused on investing in low-carbon projects.a)Only IIb)Both I IIIc)Both II IVd)Any of theseCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.What could the Tories have done to make the author comment they talked green but acted blue?I. They tried to sell off Englands forests.II. They increased solar subsidies.III. They scrapped support for wind farm subsidies.IV. They focused on investing in low-carbon projects.a)Only IIb)Both I IIIc)Both II IVd)Any of theseCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.What could the Tories have done to make the author comment they talked green but acted blue?I. They tried to sell off Englands forests.II. They increased solar subsidies.III. They scrapped support for wind farm subsidies.IV. They focused on investing in low-carbon projects.a)Only IIb)Both I IIIc)Both II IVd)Any of theseCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Scientists recently declared that the evidence is compelling enough to say that humanitys impact on the Earths atmosphere, oceans and wildlife has pushed the world into the new epoch.Britain is a world leader on the environment and has played a pivotal role in the European Union on this issue since 1986, when Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act, which established the EUs competence in this area. Yet the impact that leaving the EU would have on the UKs environmental standards rarely features in discussions. The evidence so far is clear: families in Britain, rivers, beaches and special places would pay the price if UK voted to leave.In 1995, under the last Conservative government, the UK was dirty man of Europe. Some 83% of the household waste went to landfill and just 7% was recycled or composted. By 2014, thanks to a series of EU directives, the UKs recycling rate had reached 45%.The UK currently recycles 90% of construction materials, well ahead of other countries. The Birds and Habitats Directives enabled bird and carnivore species to recover. The Natura 2000 Directive obliges the UK government to provide protected nature zones. Renewable energy capacity is growing, thanks to national targets set by the EU Renewable Energy Directive. In 2013, 15% of electricity produced in the UK came from renewable sources. Not only is the carbon footprint shrinking, it has created opportunities for renewable energy companies to grow. EU environmental legislation allows the phasing out of inefficient lightbulbs on an EU-wide basis. Also, higher standards on new car efficiency help lower fuel costs. Such strong regulations allow monitoring of environmental standards and tracking deviations. All this progress is at risk if the UK votes to leave. Anyone who thinks the environment will be better off if UK left the EU should take a long hard look at the Tory record.The Tories have talked green but acted blue.The Chinese and Indian governments have invited the European commission to help them to clean up their water and air. The EU now has global expertise in the environment. The evidence is clear. The EU has more influence globally with the UK as a member. Andas a member, UK has more influence globally. UKs voice in the Paris climate change talks was amplified because it is a part of a club of 28 countries. Leaving would mean implementing EU environment law without a seat at the table and a vote in decisions. When the UK can lead from the inside, why would it walk away? Ensuring the UK has a cleaner, greener future relies on the EU membership. Anyone who argues otherwise will be on the wrong side of history.Q.What could the Tories have done to make the author comment they talked green but acted blue?I. They tried to sell off Englands forests.II. They increased solar subsidies.III. They scrapped support for wind farm subsidies.IV. They focused on investing in low-carbon projects.a)Only IIb)Both I IIIc)Both II IVd)Any of theseCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Top Courses for CAT

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