Self-study
Many airlines offer, for a fee, to "offset" the carbon emissions produced when you fly, but Conclusion such schemes are almost entirely ineffective. ████████ ███ ████ ███ ███████ ████████ ██ ████████ ████ ████████ ██████ ██████ ██████████ ██ ████ █████ █████ ████████ █████ ████ █████████ ████ ███████ ████ ███████████ ██ ██ ██████ █████████ ███ ██████████
Summary
The author concludes that airline programs that offer to offset carbon emissions in exchange for a fee are almost entirely ineffective.
Why?
The author presents an intermediate conclusion in support: the programs don’t prevent any carbon emissions.
This is supported by a premise: in most cases, any emissions-reducing projects that are funded with the money that is paid as part of the “offset” program would have proceeded even without that money.
Notable Assumptions
We know that the emissions-reducing projects toward which the airlines’ money goes would have happened even without that money. But does that prove that the airlines’ “offset” program has no effect? What if the airlines’ money can make the projects more efficient or more effective?
We want to strengthen the argument, so we’re looking for a principle that helps confirm that the airlines’ programs aren’t effective. It’s difficult to anticipate a specific principle for this question, but perhaps something like this would help:
If a project would have occurred even without airlines’ contribution toward it, then the airlines’ contribution should be considered ineffective.
9.
Which one of the following ███████████ ██ ██████ ████ █████ ██ ███████ ███ █████████ ██ ███ █████████
a
Steps that are █████ ██ █████ ██ ████████ ███ ███████ ███████ ██ █████ ██████ ███████ ███████ ███████ ██ ███ ███████ ███ ████ ███ ████████ █████
(A) concerns whether we can hold someone responsible for a harm. But we’re trying to prove that a particular program is ineffective; we’re not trying to cast blame on the airlines for harm.
b
If an outcome █████ ████ ████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ █ ███████ ███████ ████ ███ ███████ ███ ███ █ ███████████ ██ ████ ███████
We know that the emissions-reducing projects would have occurred even in the absence of the airlines’ contribution toward them through the “offset” programs. According to (B), then, those emissions-reducing projects are not results of the airlines’ contribution toward them. (B) helps support the author’s characterization of the airlines’ “offset” programs as ineffective.
c
If a company ██ ██████████ █████ ███████████ ████ █ ██████████ ███████ ████ ██████ ███ ██ ██████████ ███████ ████████████ ███ ███ ████████ ████████████ ██ ████ ███████
(C) is designed to prove that someone shouldn’t be considered morally praiseworthy. But we’re trying to prove that a particular kind of progarm is ineffective. We’re not trying to prove anything about moral praiseworthiness.
d
Measures aimed at █████████ █ ███████ ███████ ██████ ████ ██ █████ ████ ████ ███ ██ ████████████ █████████████ ██ █████████ ████ ████████
(D) is designed to help prove that we shouldn’t take certain measures. But we’re not trying to prove that the airlines shouldn’t have tried to do something. We’re trying to prove that their “offset” programs are ineffective. That’s not a claim about what they should or should not have done.
e
If a project ███ ████████ ██████ █████████ ████ ███ ██████ ███ ███████ ██████ ██ ██████ ██████████ ████ ██ ██ ██ ███████ █████ ██ ████████ ████ ██████████
We don’t know whether the airlines’ “offset” programs do or do not tackle the largest source of carbon emissions. So this principle can’t help the argument.