Question 101·Medium·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
A 2023 analysis from the International Council on Clean Transportation states that electric vehicles (EVs) offer a clear path to lowering greenhouse-gas emissions from transportation. Because EVs have no tailpipe exhaust, the report argues, the average EV built and driven in 2023 will emit less than half as much carbon dioxide over its lifetime as a comparable gasoline-powered car. On the basis of these findings, the report concludes that widespread EV adoption will reduce total transportation emissions by nearly 50 percent by 2040.
Text 2
An op-ed from an environmental research group cautions that the climate benefits of EVs are often overstated. The authors note that manufacturing the large lithium-ion batteries used in most EVs is energy-intensive and that, in regions where electricity is generated mainly from coal, charging an EV can produce substantial indirect emissions. According to the op-ed, when battery production and electricity sources are fully accounted for, some EVs currently on the road have life-cycle emissions comparable to those of the most efficient gasoline cars.
Based on the texts, how would the authors of Text 2 most likely respond to the conclusion presented in the final sentence of Text 1?
For cross-text questions, first pinpoint the exact sentence or claim from the first text that the question asks about, and paraphrase it in your own words. Then read the relevant parts of the second text and decide whether its overall stance is to support, qualify, or challenge that claim, noting the specific reasons given. Finally, eliminate answer choices that introduce new ideas not found in either text or that describe a different attitude (for example, full agreement when the second text is clearly skeptical), and choose the option that most directly captures how the second text would respond to that precise claim.
Hints
Focus on the exact claim you’re evaluating
Reread only the final sentence of Text 1. What specific prediction is the report making about future transportation emissions?
Decide whether Text 2 agrees or challenges
Ask yourself: Does Text 2 sound like it mostly supports that optimistic prediction, or does it question how big the climate benefit of EVs really is?
Look for what might be missing from Text 1’s view
Text 2 mentions extra sources of emissions related to EVs. What parts of an EV’s environmental impact does Text 2 emphasize that are not mentioned in Text 1’s conclusion?
Match the type of disagreement to an answer choice
Choose the option where Text 2 is responding directly to the 50% reduction claim using its specific concerns, not adding new topics that never appear in Text 2.
Step-by-step Explanation
Locate and paraphrase the key conclusion in Text 1
Focus on the final sentence of Text 1:
"On the basis of these findings, the report concludes that widespread EV adoption will reduce total transportation emissions by nearly 50 percent by 2040."
Paraphrase it: If lots of people switch to EVs, total emissions from transportation will be cut almost in half by 2040.
Understand Text 2’s overall attitude toward EV benefits
Now look at the opening of Text 2:
"An op-ed from an environmental research group cautions that the climate benefits of EVs are often overstated."
This tells you the authors do not fully accept the usual optimistic claims about EVs. They are warning that people make EVs sound better for the climate than they really are.
Identify the specific concerns Text 2 raises
Text 2 gives reasons why EV benefits are exaggerated:
- Making large lithium-ion batteries is energy-intensive.
- In places where electricity comes mainly from coal, charging EVs causes indirect emissions.
- When you include battery production and electricity sources, some EVs have life-cycle emissions similar to very efficient gasoline cars.
So Text 2’s main point: if you consider all parts of an EV’s life (not just tailpipe exhaust), EVs may not reduce emissions as much as some claims suggest.
Connect Text 2’s concerns to Text 1’s prediction and match the choice
Text 1’s conclusion about a nearly 50% reduction in transportation emissions rests on EVs emitting far less over their lifetimes. But Text 2 argues that many discussions of EV benefits leave out important emissions from battery manufacturing and from coal-based electricity used for charging.
So, the authors of Text 2 would likely respond that Text 1’s projected 50% drop in emissions is too optimistic because it doesn’t fully count all EV-related emissions. Among the choices, this is exactly what choice A) By arguing that the projected emissions reduction is overstated because it ignores significant sources of EV-related emissions describes.