The pollutant, measuring very high on PM22 levels, is especially dangerous because it can travel far from its source, making it a nationwide problem affecting both cities and villages.
A. is especially dangerous because
it can travel far from its source, making it a nationwide problem affecting both cities and villages.
B. is especially dangerous because
of travelling far from its source, making it a nationwide problem affecting both cities and villages
The pollutant is dangerous because of travelling far --> who travel? Between A vs B, A is much superior as it is concise and does not distort the meaning. B is gone
C. is especially dangerous
as it has the ability of travelling far from its source,
which makes it a nationwide problem affecting both cities and villages
it can travel far vs it has the ability of travelling far -> the later is more wordy
'which' also modify the closest noun, 'the pollutant's source'. This is not the intended meaning as the pollutant should be the nationwide problem
D. (is) a specially dangerous
pollutant because it has the capability to travel far from its source
and is a nationwide problem affecting both cities as well as villages
'and' is the major issue here. By using 'and', it makes both clause parallel, losing the causality effect / meaning loss.
- It has the capability to travel far from its source and
- (It) is a nationwide problem
E. is especially dangerous pollutant
due to travelling far from its source making it a nationwide problem affecting both cities and villages.
The pollutant is especially dangerous pollutant?
due to travelling far is less superior vs option A.
Hence, A is the best answer