Why do some scientists say waiting for certainty would be unwise?
Every year millions of tonnes of plastic enter the oceans, and images of turtles tangled in nets have made the problem familiar. Less visible, but arguably more worrying, are microplastics: fragments smaller than five millimetres, produced as larger items break down or shed from synthetic clothing in the wash. These particles have been found in the deepest ocean trenches and in the guts of fish eaten by humans. The long-term effects on health are not yet understood, and scientists are wary of making claims that the evidence cannot support. However, many argue that waiting for certainty would be unwise, since plastic does not disappear: it merely becomes smaller. Reducing the amount produced is therefore likely to be more effective than cleaning up what is already there.
Answer and explanation
Correct answer: D. Plastic persists in smaller forms rather than vanishing
- Step 1: The passage says plastic does not disappear but becomes smaller.
Answer
Plastic persists in smaller forms rather than vanishing.
Why not the others: Health effects are said to be unknown, cleaning is not called cheaper, and public opinion is not mentioned.
Practise more Reading: society and technology.
Free questions with an explanation for every one, and full timed Cyprus English Language Certification (B2, C1, C2) mock tests.
More Reading: society and technology questions
- According to the passage, why might handwritten notes lead to better memory?
- What is the writer's attitude to the research on note-taking?
- The word "legible" in the passage is closest in meaning to
- What does the writer predict about the future of handwriting?
- Which of the following is NOT named in the passage as something people still write by hand?
- Why do supporters believe cities can suit bees?