Question 150·Medium·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
A recent policy report argues that planting two million saplings in the metropolitan region over the next decade will substantially lower summer temperatures and absorb significant amounts of carbon dioxide. According to the report, this large-scale tree-planting initiative is the most cost-effective way for the city to meet its climate-mitigation goals.
Text 2
Urban ecologist Maya Chen counters that the policy report overlooks critical timing and maintenance issues. Chen notes that saplings contribute little shade or carbon sequestration for at least twenty years and that many do not survive beyond their first five years without intensive care. She adds that the city is simultaneously losing hundreds of mature trees annually to development—losses that cannot be offset quickly by new plantings.
Based on the texts, how would Chen (the author of Text 2) most likely respond to the policy report’s claim in Text 1 that the tree-planting initiative is the most cost-effective climate-mitigation strategy?
For cross-text connection questions, first separate the roles of the two texts: ask, “What claim is Text 1 making?” and “How does Text 2 react to that claim—agree, qualify, or oppose?” Underline key words that show stance (like "however," "counters," "supports") and the specific reasons given. Then, before looking at the choices, briefly paraphrase how the second author would respond to the first. Finally, eliminate any option that introduces new topics, contradicts the second author’s tone, or ignores the specific reasoning, and choose the one that most closely matches your paraphrase.
Hints
Clarify Text 1’s main claim
Focus on the final sentence of Text 1. What does the report claim about how effective and cost‑effective the sapling initiative is for climate goals?
Check whether Chen agrees or disagrees
Look at the first sentence of Text 2, especially the word "counters," and the phrase "overlooks critical timing and maintenance issues." Does that suggest full agreement or a challenge to the report’s claim?
Zoom in on Chen’s specific reasons
Pay attention to what Chen says about how much shade and carbon saplings provide, how long that takes, and the survival of the trees. Which choice reflects those specific concerns instead of introducing new topics?
Step-by-step Explanation
Identify the key claim in Text 1
Look at what Text 1 says about the tree‑planting plan:
- It argues that planting two million saplings "will substantially lower summer temperatures and absorb significant amounts of carbon dioxide."
- It also says this initiative "is the most cost-effective way for the city to meet its climate-mitigation goals."
So Text 1 is very positive and confident about both the size and the cost-effectiveness of the climate benefits from planting saplings.
Determine Chen’s overall stance in Text 2
Now see how Text 2 (Chen) reacts:
- It begins: "Maya Chen counters that the policy report overlooks critical timing and maintenance issues." The word "counters" shows she is disagreeing, not fully agreeing.
- She notes that saplings "contribute little shade or carbon sequestration for at least twenty years."
- She also says many saplings die without intensive care.
- Finally, she points out the city is losing "hundreds of mature trees annually"—losses that new saplings cannot replace quickly.
Overall, Chen is saying the report is missing important problems that affect how effective this plan actually is.
Connect Chen’s points to the cost-effectiveness claim
The question asks how Chen would respond to the specific claim that the initiative is the most cost-effective climate-mitigation strategy.
Chen’s points imply:
- Benefits are delayed: Young trees give "little shade or carbon" for decades, so the short‑term climate impact is small.
- Many saplings die: That reduces the benefits and makes the plan less efficient.
- Loss of mature trees: The city is losing current, high‑value trees faster than new ones can replace them.
Together, these ideas mean the report is overestimating how big and how fast the climate benefits will be, which undercuts its claim that this is the best, most cost‑effective solution.
Match this understanding to the answer choices
Now compare that understanding to each option:
- The correct answer must show that Chen challenges the report’s cost‑effectiveness claim by focusing on the limited, delayed benefits of saplings and the gap created by losing mature trees.
- Choice C says that Chen would respond by noting that the report’s projected benefits are overstated because young trees offer minimal immediate cooling and carbon capture.
This exactly matches Chen’s actual criticisms in Text 2, so Choice C is correct.