PASSAGE MAP:- Myth: Environmental managers believe regulations affect all competitors uniformly
- Truth: Regulatory costs fall unevenly, benefiting some and disadvantaging others
- Example 1: Location — plants near larger non-compliant competitors attract less regulatory attention → lower costs
- Example 2: Size — large plants spread costs across larger revenue base; small plants may be exempt from permit/reporting requirements entirely
- Example 3: Age of technology — older coal-fired burners generate sulfur dioxide/nitrogen oxide → heavy compliance costs; newer facilities avoid these processes altogether
- Conclusion: Environmental managers must recognise the myth, anticipate regulatory pressure, and explore how changing regulations affect their company specifically to gain a competitive edge
Q1 — Large plant might spend more than smaller plant because:(A) Speculation — regulator attention is linked to location near non-compliant competitors, not plant size ❌
(B) Correct — smaller plants are exempt from permit/reporting requirements by virtue of their size, therefore larger plants are not exempt → higher costs ✅
(C) Never mentioned — supply chains and cost passing never discussed ❌
(D) Speculation — older technology and plant size are never linked in the passage ❌
(E) Never mentioned — passage never compares severity of waste between large and small plants ❌
Q2 — Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide outputs:(A) Speculation — "cannot be adapted" goes beyond what the passage says; it only says older technologies continue to generate these outputs ❌
(B) Speculation — passage mentions compliance costs, never an outright ban or prohibition ❌
(C) Correct — passage explicitly states extensive compliance costs are imposed on plants still using older burners that generate these outputs, and newer facilities avoid them implying older ones have not changed ✅
(D) Opposite — passage implies older plants have not innovated; newer facilities are the ones avoiding these processes ❌
(E) Speculation — passage never compares cost of older production processes vs alternative processes ❌
Q3 — Role of highlighted text about large plants:(A) Half right — there is a hypothesis earlier but the highlighted text does not disprove it, it supports the truth that counters it ❌
(B) Never mentioned — "on the other hand" only contrasts large vs small plants within one example, not two opposing passage ideas ❌
(C) Correct — the examples support the author's claim/truth that regulations affect companies differently, not the misconception ✅
(D) Opposite — the examples fight against the misconception, they do not exemplify it ❌
(E) Never mentioned — no analogy between two different situations is being drawn ❌
Q4 — Primary purpose:(A) Wrong verb + wrong scope — "suggest solutions" is never done; author corrects a misconception, not solve environmental problems ❌
(B) Wrong verb + too narrow — passage is about compliance costs not compliance levels, and "illustrate" undersells the author's purpose ❌
(C) Never mentioned — alternatives to traditional methods never discussed anywhere ❌
(D) Too narrow + wrong verb — author never advocates for more compliance, she advocates for strategic thinking ❌
(E) Correct — right verb, right scope. Opens with a myth, corrects it with three examples, concludes with what managers should do instead ✅