In the five years after adopting the Paris Agreement

In the five years after adopting the Paris Agreement as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase in nations that did not ratify the treaty.

(A) ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase -Incorrect
(B) emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4% on average, an increase less than half as great as-Incorrect
(C) average emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as that-Incorrect
A B C all have Modifier error , it is ratifying nations that are adopting the agreement not the emissions

(D) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, an increase less than half as great as that-Correct
Eliminates modifier error , conveys correct meaning

(E) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, less than half as great as that-Incorrect
this gives a meaning that average is less than half as great as that in the nations that did not ratify

Option D is the Correct Answer

In the five years after adopting the Paris Agreement as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase in nations that did not ratify the treaty.

(A) ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase --> Incorrect. Comparison error. Close second to the correct answer. 3.4% can't be compared to the increase.

(B) emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4% on average, an increase less than half as great as --> Incorrect. Comparison error. The 'increase' can't be compared to 'nations'.

(C) average emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as that --> Incorrect. Pronoun error. It is unclear to which entity 'that' is referring.

(D) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, an increase less than half as great as that --> Correct. Clearly mentions the entity to which 'that' refers.

(E) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, less than half as great as that --> Correct. Pronoun error. It is unclear to which entity 'that' is referring.

In the five years after adopting the Paris Agreement as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase in nations that did not ratify the treaty.


(A) ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase
- Sentence is trying to convey comparison of greenhouse gas emission in nations that entered the treaty and that did not enter the treaty.Here what is less than half ? Greenhouse Gas emission / increase in emission. Sentence is trying to convey that increase is less than half but it does not clearly convey. So Eliminate A

(B) emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4% on average, an increase less than half as great as
- " as great as in nations" , as great as what in nations is not clearly mentioned. So Eliminate B

(C) average emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as that
- Same as A , what is less than half ? Greenhouse Gas emission / increase in emission. Sentence is trying to convey that increase is less than half but it does not clearly convey. Eliminate C

(D) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, an increase less than half as great as that
Correct- This statement clearly conveys the meaning by using " increase less than and compares that increase correctly with nations by using "that" to refer to" increase"

(E) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, less than half as great as that
- Same as A , what is less than half ? Greenhouse Gas emission / increase in emission. Sentence is trying to convey that increase is less than half but it does not clearly convey. Eliminate E

ANS Choice D

Dream it! Achieve it!

Question: In the five years after adopting the Paris Agreement as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase in nations that did not ratify the treaty.

(A) ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase
No... "ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions" can't adopt an agreement.

(B) emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4% on average, an increase less than half as great as
No... "emissions" can't adopt an agreement.

(C) average emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as that
No... "averages" can't adopt an agreement.

(D) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, an increase less than half as great as that
Yes... "an increase" refers directly to 3.4% and allows the following "that" to reference 3.4% also.

(E) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, less than half as great as that
No... The final "that" references "less than half" ... less than half of what? The agreement or the percent?

Correct Answer: D.

(A) ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase
emissions are not adopting the Paris Agreement (wrong)

(B) emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4% on average, an increase less than half as great as
a modifier is incorrectly modifying emissions (wrong)

(C) average emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as that
a modifier is incorrectly modifying emission conveying a meaning that emissions are adopting the Paris agreement (wrong)

(D) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, an increase less than half as great as that
modifier correctly modifying ratifying nations
and an appositive is correctly modifying increase (correct)

(E) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, less than half as great as that
what is less than half? is it 3.4 % we are talking about an increase and an increase is less than half ......here meaning is not clear so (wrong)

In the five years after adopting the Paris Agreement as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase in nations that did not ratify the treaty.

(A) ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase
misplacement of average - it should refer to increase and placed right next to it or to 3.4%

(B) emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4% on average, an increase less than half as great as
an increase less than half as great as should be followed by parallel subject: an increase less than half as great as increase in...

(C) average emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as that
misplacement of average, improper placement of "that" that must refer to subject

(D) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, an increase less than half as great as that
although akward, this option lacks all the errors, therefore best option to pick from

(E) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, less than half as great as that
misplacement of "average"

IMO, answer is D

Error Analysis:
1. Phrase "In the five years..." is modifying 'nations' and must be followed by the the same and not the possessive form "Nation's'.
2. Present Continuous form of verb must be used as the effects are still being perceived. Usage of Simple Past tense is wrong.
3. Noun+Noun Modifier must follow the clause

(A) ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase-Incorrect, for the reasons stated in the Error Analysis
(B) emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4% on average, an increase less than half as great as -Incorrect, Now the preceding phrase "In the five years...." incorrectly modifies 'emissions'.
(C) average emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as that -Incorrect, Now the preceding phrase "In the five years...." incorrectly modifies 'average emissions'
(D) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, an increase less than half as great as that -Correct, Noun + Noun Modifier correctly modifies the preceding clause.
(E) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, less than half as great as that-Incorrect, Noun+noun modifier missing

Ans:D

In the five years after adopting the Paris Agreement as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase in nations that did not ratify the treaty.

(A) ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase .Incorrect. A modifier "In the …….change", should be followed by a noun entity


(B) emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4% on average, an increase less than half as great as.Incorrect.Same as in option A modifier "In the …….change", should be followed by a noun entity

(C) average emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as that.Incorrect.Same expalination as in A and B.

(D) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, an increase less than half as great as that.Correct.Perfect A modifier followed by a noun entity ratifying nations and "an increase " correctly modifies increase by 34%

(E) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, less than half as great as that.Incorrect. Although the modifier"In the five years...…...change' followed by a modifier ratifying nations but again ," less than.....that" is ambiguous.

In the five years after adopting the Paris Agreement as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase in nations that did not ratify the treaty.

(A) ratifying nations’ average greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as the increase -Incorrect. The first is a modifier modifying the nounratifying nations & not ratifying nation's average greenhouse gas emissions
(B) emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4% on average, an increase less than half as great as- Incorrect Same as explained in A. Starting modifier isn't modifying emission of greenhouse gasses
(C) average emissions of greenhouse gases in ratifying nations increased by 3.4%, less than half as great as that- Incorrect. Same as explained in A, modifier isn't modifying average emissions
(D) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, an increase less than half as great as that - Correct structure. notice here that an increase less than is a noun + noun modifier correctly telling us more information about the increase
(E) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, less than half as great as that- Incorrect. This structure is incorrect since less than appears to modify the entire preceding clause

Hence the answer must be D

Can someone explain why D seems to be clearly better than E?

Hi PTD1995

Actually there is no obvious difference, if any at all, between D and E. An appositive in D and comma + comparison phrase in E can be preferred to one another under certain circumstances, or interchangeably used under other circumstances, as in our case here. Let’s first clarify what is what:

Appositive is noun + noun modifiers, for example: a greater proportion than…, twice the number…, more water than…
Comma + comparison phrase doesn’t have a noun before ‘than’ or 'as', for example: more than…, greater than…, 25 percent less than…, as may as...

If you are going to use comma + comparison phrase, then it's incorrect unless there's actually a quantity in front of the comma, for example:

- Last year I read 40 books, twice as many as I read in the preceding year. (correct)
- Last year the number of books I read increased dramatically, twice as many as I read in the preceding year. (incorrect)

In the last example, there is no quantity word before the comma, and therefore comma + comparison phrase has nothing to modify. In such cases you use an appositive to correctly modify the number of books:

- Last year the number of books I read increased dramatically, twice the number I read in the preceding year.

As you see, when the noun phrase we need to modify is located not right before the comma, we prefer an appositive because it makes the sentence unambiguous. Below are official examples:

- About 20 percent of young adults used cocaine in 1979, twice the number reported in the 1977 survey.
- Soaring television costs accounted for more than half the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992, a greater proportion than in any previous election.

However, when the noun phrase we are modifying is right before the comma, we can simply use comma + comparison phrase to keep the sentence concise. Below is an official example:

- Lake Baikal holds 20 percent of the world's fresh water, more than all the North American Great Lakes combined.

Here, more than all the North American Great Lakes combined modifies the quantity 20 percent of the world's fresh water. We could also write more water than all the NA Great Lakes combined, but because that quantity word is close enough (right before the comma) and thus modification is unambiguous, the word water is dropped and implied. Some more official examples:

- In 1979 lack of rain reduced India’s rice production to about 41 million tons, nearly 25 percent less than the 1978 harvest.
- Companies in the United States are providing job training and general education for nearly eight million people, as many as are enrolled in the nation’s four-year colleges and universities.
- Bihar is India’s poorest state, with an annual per capita income of $111, lower than that of the most impoverished countries of the world.


Finally, let’s juxtapose D and E of our initial problem:

D) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, an increase less than half as great as that
E) ratifying nations have seen average greenhouse gas emissions increase by 3.4%, less than half as great as that

In option E, there is a quantity increase by 3.4% right before the comma, and the main adjective as great as can correctly modify that quantity noun phrase. In other words, the main noun, in the noun phrase increase by 3.4%, is increase. Because increase is a quantity word, we use great to modify it. So, the usage of comma + comparison phrase in E is correct.

D, on other hand, uses an appositive to modify increase by 3.4%. While that appositive isn’t incorrect, it’s not really necessary because the noun being modified increase by 3.4% stands just right before the comma and there is no danger of ambiguity. As I have already mentioned, we usually use appositives (in making comparisons) to refer to nouns standing a bit far away and thereby to avoid ambiguity.

Conclusion: To my mind, both E and D are grammatically correct, while E is stylistically superior because of its concision.

Take a look at this post for more questions to practice and read a comment from GMATGuruNY himself: https://gmatclub.com/forum/scientists-a ... l#p2418759

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.