Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
May 2008:00 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
What’s in it for you- Live Profile Evaluation Chat Session with Jenifer Turtschanow, CEO, ARINGO. Come with your details prepared and ARINGO will share insights! Pre-MBA Role/Industry, YOE, Exam Score, C/GPA, ECs Post-MBA Role/ Industry & School List.
Jun 1006:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..
Updated on: 18 May 2026, 00:08
Originally posted by sahilvijay on 01 Mar 2018, 05:18.
Last edited by Bunuel on 18 May 2026, 00:08, edited 5 times in total.
Last edited by Bunuel on 18 May 2026, 00:08, edited 5 times in total.
Kudos
Bookmarks
Question 1
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
56% (03:17) correct
44%
(03:24) wrong
based on 722
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Question 2
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
47% (01:14) correct 53%
(01:20) wrong
based on 769
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Question 3
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
25%
(medium)
Question Stats:
64% (00:54) correct 36%
(01:03) wrong
based on 759
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Question 4
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
59% (01:00) correct 41%
(00:56) wrong
based on 743
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Reducing atmospheric CO2 by a deliberate carbon dioxide removal (CDR) strategy is one option being considered for combating global warming caused by the current high levels of atmospheric CO2. Before implementation can occur, it is important to have a reference goal for a planned reduction of the global CO2 concentration against which any specific strategy can be assessed. Scientists agree that a modest aim would be to seek to reduce the CO2 concentration by 50 ppm, which is the equivalent of removing 400 gigatons of CO2,or an average of 4 GtCO2/yr over 100 years. At this substantial level of reduction, it is still expected that dangerous levels of atmospheric CO2 would persist.
Even in the limiting case in which all emissions of CO2 cease, it is not straightforward to estimate how much CO2 must be removed from the atmosphere to lower its content by 4 GtCO2 annually. During any period of zero emissions but no CDR implementation, the atmospheric CO2 concentration will fall. Ocean currents continually bring deep ocean water to the surface that was last at the surface hundreds of years before, when the atmospheric CO2 concentration was at its preindustrial value. As equilibrium is established at the ocean surface between CO2 in the air and dissolved in the ocean, such ocean water scavenges CO2 from the atmosphere. So, with a time scale of hundreds of years, some atmospheric CO2 reduction is done naturally (at the expense of growing acidity in the ocean).
The same requirement for equilibrium at the ocean surface governs the reverse effect that would happen if the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere were lowered someday by deliberate removal of CO2. There would be an immediate compensating transfer of CO2 from the ocean to the atmosphere, as a result of which it would be necessary to remove more than one unit of CO2 from the atmosphere to reduce the atmospheric CO2 content by one unit. Forest responses add complications, as do deep ocean currents. Today, the combined effect of ocean and land CO2 “sinks” results, for a time-scale measured in decades, in roughly half of the CO2 remaining in the atmosphere that was emitted to the atmosphere by the burning of fossil fuel, but the future magnitudes of these sinks are uncertain.
Even in the limiting case in which all emissions of CO2 cease, it is not straightforward to estimate how much CO2 must be removed from the atmosphere to lower its content by 4 GtCO2 annually. During any period of zero emissions but no CDR implementation, the atmospheric CO2 concentration will fall. Ocean currents continually bring deep ocean water to the surface that was last at the surface hundreds of years before, when the atmospheric CO2 concentration was at its preindustrial value. As equilibrium is established at the ocean surface between CO2 in the air and dissolved in the ocean, such ocean water scavenges CO2 from the atmosphere. So, with a time scale of hundreds of years, some atmospheric CO2 reduction is done naturally (at the expense of growing acidity in the ocean).
The same requirement for equilibrium at the ocean surface governs the reverse effect that would happen if the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere were lowered someday by deliberate removal of CO2. There would be an immediate compensating transfer of CO2 from the ocean to the atmosphere, as a result of which it would be necessary to remove more than one unit of CO2 from the atmosphere to reduce the atmospheric CO2 content by one unit. Forest responses add complications, as do deep ocean currents. Today, the combined effect of ocean and land CO2 “sinks” results, for a time-scale measured in decades, in roughly half of the CO2 remaining in the atmosphere that was emitted to the atmosphere by the burning of fossil fuel, but the future magnitudes of these sinks are uncertain.
1. Which of the following is listed as a natural phenomenon that would require a CDR strategy to remove CO2by an amount greater than its desired CO2 reduction target?
(A) the presence of land CO2 “sinks”
(B) the presence of ocean CO2 “sinks”
(C) equilibrium at the ocean surface
(D) deep ocean water moving to the surface
(E) scavenging of CO2 by the ocean surface
(A) the presence of land CO2 “sinks”
(B) the presence of ocean CO2 “sinks”
(C) equilibrium at the ocean surface
(D) deep ocean water moving to the surface
(E) scavenging of CO2 by the ocean surface
2. The author discusses ocean and land CO2 “sinks” in order to:
(A) explain how much of the CO2 emitted by the burning of fossil fuels remains in the atmosphere
(B) highlight how uncertain the future is regarding the magnitude of CO2 emissions from fossil fuels
(C) highlight the challenges in determining natural effects on CO2 levels when implementing a CDR strategy
(D) clarify why it would be necessary to remove more than one unit of CO2 from the atmosphere to reduce the atmospheric CO2 content by one unit
(E) emphasize that there are many natural means by which CO2 is removed from the atmosphere.
(A) explain how much of the CO2 emitted by the burning of fossil fuels remains in the atmosphere
(B) highlight how uncertain the future is regarding the magnitude of CO2 emissions from fossil fuels
(C) highlight the challenges in determining natural effects on CO2 levels when implementing a CDR strategy
(D) clarify why it would be necessary to remove more than one unit of CO2 from the atmosphere to reduce the atmospheric CO2 content by one unit
(E) emphasize that there are many natural means by which CO2 is removed from the atmosphere.
3. The author uses the content in the parentheses at end of the 2nd paragraph to:
(A) provide additional information about how the natural process of atmospheric CO2 reduction occurs
(B) emphasize the importance of a negative effect that would result from a natural process
(C) highlight one result from the many natural processes related to CO2 removal
(D) present a negative effect that is not directly related to the primary purpose of the paragraph
(E) show the importance of natural removal of CO2 in the atmosphere
(A) provide additional information about how the natural process of atmospheric CO2 reduction occurs
(B) emphasize the importance of a negative effect that would result from a natural process
(C) highlight one result from the many natural processes related to CO2 removal
(D) present a negative effect that is not directly related to the primary purpose of the paragraph
(E) show the importance of natural removal of CO2 in the atmosphere
4. All of the following are discussed in the passage EXCEPT:
(A) details on how CO2 will be removed from the atmosphere by a CDR strategy
(B) difficulties in measuring the effects of a CDR strategy on CO2 reduction
(C) increases in atmospheric CO2 levels resulting from natural processes
(D) decreases in atmospheric CO2 result resulting from natural processes
(E) the risk of high atmospheric levels of CO2 in the atmosphere
(A) details on how CO2 will be removed from the atmosphere by a CDR strategy
(B) difficulties in measuring the effects of a CDR strategy on CO2 reduction
(C) increases in atmospheric CO2 levels resulting from natural processes
(D) decreases in atmospheric CO2 result resulting from natural processes
(E) the risk of high atmospheric levels of CO2 in the atmosphere
gmatexam439
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
Posts: 1,053
08 Mar 2018, 11:08
Kudos
Bookmarks
Got all correct. I hope this explanation helps someone
Reducing atmospheric CO2 by a deliberate carbon dioxide removal (CDR) strategy is one option being considered for combating global warming caused by the current high levels of atmospheric CO2. Before implementation can occur, it is important to have a reference goal for a planned reduction of the global CO2 concentration against which any specific strategy can be assessed. Scientists agree that a modest aim would be to seek to reduce the CO2 concentration by 50 ppm, which is the equivalent of removing 400 gigatons of CO2,or an average of 4 GtCO2/yr over 100 years. At this substantial level of reduction, it is still expected that dangerous levels of atmospheric CO2 would persist.
Even in the limiting case in which all emissions of CO2 cease, it is not straightforward to estimate how much CO2 must be removed from the atmosphere to lower its content by 4 GtCO2 annually. During any period of zero emissions but no CDR implementation, the atmospheric CO2 concentration will fall. Ocean currents continually bring deep ocean water to the surface that was last at the surface hundreds of years before, when the atmospheric CO2 concentration was at its preindustrial value. As equilibrium is established at the ocean surface between CO2 in the air and dissolved in the ocean, such ocean water scavenges CO2 from the atmosphere. So, with a time scale of hundreds of years, some atmospheric CO2 reduction is done naturally (at the expense of growing acidity in the ocean).
The same requirement for equilibrium at the ocean surface governs the reverse effect that would happen if the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere were lowered someday by deliberate removal of CO2. There would be an immediate compensating transfer of CO2 from the ocean to the atmosphere, as a result of which it would be necessary to remove more than one unit of CO2 from the atmosphere to reduce the atmospheric CO2 content by one unit. Forest responses add complications, as do deep ocean currents. Today, the combined effect of ocean and land CO2 “sinks” results, for a time-scale measured in decades, in roughly half of the CO2 remaining in the atmosphere that was emitted to the atmosphere by the burning of fossil fuel, but the future magnitudes of these sinks are uncertain.
Even in the limiting case in which all emissions of CO2 cease, it is not straightforward to estimate how much CO2 must be removed from the atmosphere to lower its content by 4 GtCO2 annually. During any period of zero emissions but no CDR implementation, the atmospheric CO2 concentration will fall. Ocean currents continually bring deep ocean water to the surface that was last at the surface hundreds of years before, when the atmospheric CO2 concentration was at its preindustrial value. As equilibrium is established at the ocean surface between CO2 in the air and dissolved in the ocean, such ocean water scavenges CO2 from the atmosphere. So, with a time scale of hundreds of years, some atmospheric CO2 reduction is done naturally (at the expense of growing acidity in the ocean).
The same requirement for equilibrium at the ocean surface governs the reverse effect that would happen if the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere were lowered someday by deliberate removal of CO2. There would be an immediate compensating transfer of CO2 from the ocean to the atmosphere, as a result of which it would be necessary to remove more than one unit of CO2 from the atmosphere to reduce the atmospheric CO2 content by one unit. Forest responses add complications, as do deep ocean currents. Today, the combined effect of ocean and land CO2 “sinks” results, for a time-scale measured in decades, in roughly half of the CO2 remaining in the atmosphere that was emitted to the atmosphere by the burning of fossil fuel, but the future magnitudes of these sinks are uncertain.
Question1. Which of the following is listed as a natural phenomenon that would require a CDR strategy to remove CO2by an amount greater than its desired CO2 reduction target?
A) the presence of land CO2 “sinks” --Sinks reduce the Co2 levels
B) the presence of ocean CO2 “sinks” --Sinks reduce the CO2 levels
C) equilibrium at the ocean surface --Correct. If the CDR reduces CO2 then because of equilibrium oceans will release more CO2.
D) deep ocean water moving to the surface --It reduces CO2
E) scavenging of CO2 by the ocean surface --It reduces CO2
Question 2. The author discusses ocean and land CO2 “sinks” in order to:
A) explain how much of the CO2 emitted by the burning of fossil fuels remains in the atmosphere --Sinks reduce CO2
B) highlight how uncertain the future is regarding the magnitude of CO2 emissions from fossil fuels --Uncertainity id regarding the removal of CO2 not the emission from fossils
C) highlight the challenges in determining natural effects on CO2 levels when implementing a CDR strategy --COrrect. The 3 para talks about 2 challanges: equillibrium & forests+ocean sink
D) clarify why it would be necessary to remove more than one unit of CO2 from the atmosphere to reduce the atmospheric CO2 content by one unit --No. Only equillibrium causes this issue. SInks help in reducing CO2
E) emphasize that there are many natural means by which CO2 is removed from the atmosphere. --Certainly not
Question 3. The author uses the content in the parentheses at end of the 2nd paragraph to:
A) provide additional information about how the natural process of atmospheric CO2 reduction occurs --Wrong
B) emphasize the importance of a negative effect that would result from a natural process --Wrong
C) highlight one result from the many natural processes related to CO2 removal --Wrong
D) present a negative effect that is not directly related to the primary purpose of the paragraph --Correct. It is just an additional piece of information unrelated to the passage
E) show the importance of natural removal of CO2 in the atmosphere --Wrong
Question 4. All of the following are discussed in the passage EXCEPT:
(A) details on how CO2 will be removed from the atmosphere by a CDR strategy --Not discussed
(B) difficulties in measuring the effects of a CDR strategy on CO2 reduction --Talked in 3 para
(C) increases in atmospheric CO2 levels resulting from natural processes --Talked in 3 para
(D) decreases in atmospheric CO2 result resulting from natural processes --Talked in 2 para
(E) the risk of high atmospheric levels of CO2 in the atmosphere --Talked in 1 para
A) the presence of land CO2 “sinks” --Sinks reduce the Co2 levels
B) the presence of ocean CO2 “sinks” --Sinks reduce the CO2 levels
C) equilibrium at the ocean surface --Correct. If the CDR reduces CO2 then because of equilibrium oceans will release more CO2.
D) deep ocean water moving to the surface --It reduces CO2
E) scavenging of CO2 by the ocean surface --It reduces CO2
Question 2. The author discusses ocean and land CO2 “sinks” in order to:
A) explain how much of the CO2 emitted by the burning of fossil fuels remains in the atmosphere --Sinks reduce CO2
B) highlight how uncertain the future is regarding the magnitude of CO2 emissions from fossil fuels --Uncertainity id regarding the removal of CO2 not the emission from fossils
C) highlight the challenges in determining natural effects on CO2 levels when implementing a CDR strategy --COrrect. The 3 para talks about 2 challanges: equillibrium & forests+ocean sink
D) clarify why it would be necessary to remove more than one unit of CO2 from the atmosphere to reduce the atmospheric CO2 content by one unit --No. Only equillibrium causes this issue. SInks help in reducing CO2
E) emphasize that there are many natural means by which CO2 is removed from the atmosphere. --Certainly not
Question 3. The author uses the content in the parentheses at end of the 2nd paragraph to:
A) provide additional information about how the natural process of atmospheric CO2 reduction occurs --Wrong
B) emphasize the importance of a negative effect that would result from a natural process --Wrong
C) highlight one result from the many natural processes related to CO2 removal --Wrong
D) present a negative effect that is not directly related to the primary purpose of the paragraph --Correct. It is just an additional piece of information unrelated to the passage
E) show the importance of natural removal of CO2 in the atmosphere --Wrong
Question 4. All of the following are discussed in the passage EXCEPT:
(A) details on how CO2 will be removed from the atmosphere by a CDR strategy --Not discussed
(B) difficulties in measuring the effects of a CDR strategy on CO2 reduction --Talked in 3 para
(C) increases in atmospheric CO2 levels resulting from natural processes --Talked in 3 para
(D) decreases in atmospheric CO2 result resulting from natural processes --Talked in 2 para
(E) the risk of high atmospheric levels of CO2 in the atmosphere --Talked in 1 para
General Discussion
