- Fri Oct 12, 2018 6:24 pm
#59507
Chian,
The stimulus observes that if carbon emissions stopped today, the temperature would still rise for several decades. We are asked to explain why the effect (temperatures rising) would continue even if we are no longer producing the cause (carbon emissions).
Answer choice (A) points out that the cause will remain for decades after we stop producing it, which explains why the effect will also remain for decades. That's a clear response to the paradox claimed by the stimulus.
You expressed some confusion about the sulfate part. I would pick (A) because you can see how part of it clearly resolves the paradox, while--let's see the other choices.
(B) It's a global phenomenon, not explained by local concentrations.
(C) It's irrelevant when people understood the phenomenon.
(D) The stimulus just said we're stopping all emissions, doesn't matter where they're from.
(E) Stimulus isn't about acid rain.
So, that's a great reason to pick (A) on the test where you might not always be able to resolve every confusion you experience. I know I don't bother and it doesn't hurt my accuracy, so you should try it too.
Getting back to the part you found confusing, the part about sulfates also helps resolve the paradox. Sulfates decrease temperature, so they counteract the carbon dioxide. If the sulfates fall out of the atmosphere immediately but the carbon dioxide remains for decades, you have the cause without any counteraction, so temperatures will continue to rise.