Developed countries around the world have pledged to reduce global car

Hey there shriramvelamuri – I didn’t write the question or the answer so the following is IMHO.

According to Mike McGarry at Magoosh there are 4 ways to strengthen a question.
A. Strengthen the premises: either provide direct support to one of the premises of the argument, or add new premises that independently support the conclusion
B. Strengthen the assumption: directly affirm the truth of an assumption of the argument, or provide evidence or support for an assumption.
C. Strengthen the conclusion: provide some kind of alternate support of, direct measurement of, or independent confirmation of the conclusion
D. Weaken an objection: use any of the weakening techniques on an implicit or explicit objection to the argument.

I think B is correct because it strengthens an assumption. I believe the conclusion is the following sentence: “However, this goal will translate into a much greater per-capita requirement on people in the developing world.”

Although the conclusion sentence does begin with a conclusion indicator word such as therefore, so, or thus it summarizes the conclusion of the argument. The word “however” sounds like it’s trying to confuse the reader.

So when I read the conclusion without the however I am thinking what is being assumed to make that conclusion. Please note that I think the use of “per-capita” is also trying to confuse you. You can substitute “percentage decline” instead.

While I read the question certain things come to mind in terms of assumptions. I’m just brainstorming right now.

Developed countries probably have more total emissions than developing countries. Developed countries have more infrastructure and energy requirements which are consistent with a higher standard of living.
Developed countries have a lower population growth than developing countries. Think Western Europe and Japan where their populations are actually declining.
Using these assumptions as I look at the questions I see that answer B restates my first sentence. It affirms my assumption and actually provided evidence. “Developed countries probably have more total emissions than developing countries”. Personally I can’t quantify the amount but answer B did for me.

I try and quantification of the amount of emissions output.

Assume emissions from developed countries is 1,000,000 and emissions from developing is 100,000. We know that developed countries are going to cut emissions but 50% and developing countries by 23%. But we are assuming that the population in developing countries is growing faster than developed countries. As countries develop their energy requirements and emissions is greater than its population growth.

Assume the following: Emissions 100,000 and population 100,000 at 2010. Population growth 10% and emissions growth 15% for the next 40 years. Let’s round 23% to 25%, therefore emissions will be cut to 75,000 by 2050. But assuming emissions growth, the emissions output will be approx. 202,000. So the actual emissions reduction is 63% not 23%.