The Truth about the Environment: reading answers and analysis
The writer argues that the world's environment is improving on most measures: more resources, more food, fewer extinctions than feared. He gives four reasons people think otherwise: lopsided research funding, green groups that overstate, bad-news media and poor individual perception. On global warming, he says cutting emissions costs more than adapting, and money would do more good on clean water.
The YES / NO / NOT GIVEN block (27-32) is answered almost entirely in paragraph 2. The multiple choice (33-37) takes the four factors in order, one paragraph each, then the waste figures. The summary (38-40) goes back to the end of paragraph 2 before jumping to the clean-water paragraph near the end.
Answer key and self-check
Type what you wrote and hit mark. Hide the key first if you haven't done the passage yet. Every question number jumps to its explanation.
How to attack this block: Paragraph 2 is dense with claims, so read it slowly. Two NOT GIVENs borrow real details (1972, extinction) and add something the writer never says. The NOs reverse the writer's view on starvation and economic growth.
Question 27
Answer: YESParagraph 1 and Paragraph 3
Does the writer think there are several causes behind environmentalists' gloomy outlook?
For many environmentalists, the world seems to be getting worse… four factors seem to cause this disjunction between perception and reality.
Question says → Passage says
take a pessimistic view of the worldthe world seems to be getting worse
for a number of reasonsfour factors seem to cause
Why: YES. The writer opens with the environmentalists' bleak view, then says four factors explain the gap between that perception and reality, and spends paragraphs 4-8 listing them. 'A number of reasons' is 'four factors'.
The trap: Paragraph 3 talks about 'many people' rather than environmentalists, which makes some students hesitate. But the four factors include the green groups' own behaviour, so the writer is explaining their pessimism too.
Question 28
Answer: NOT GIVENParagraph 2, second sentence
Have records of natural resources only been kept since 1972?
energy and other natural resources have become more abundant, not less so, since the book 'The Limits to Growth' was published in 1972
Question says → Passage says
since 1972since the book 'The Limits to Growth' was published in 1972
Why: NOT GIVEN. 1972 is when a book was published, used as a reference point for comparing resources. The writer says nothing about when data collection started.
The trap: The same year and the word 'since' appear in both, which makes it look like TRUE. Check what happened in 1972: a book came out, not the first data.
Question 29
Answer: NOParagraph 2, third and fourth sentences
Has the number of starving people gone up recently?
more food is now produced per head of the world's population than at any time in history. Fewer people are starving.
Question says → Passage says
The number of starving people… has increasedFewer people are starving
Why: NO. The writer says fewer people are starving, which is the direct opposite of an increase.
The trap: Paragraph 1 lists the fear of 'less and less to eat', but that's the environmentalists' view, which the writer is rejecting. The question asks for the writer's claim.
Question 30
Answer: NOT GIVENParagraph 2, fifth sentence
Are new species taking the place of extinct ones?
although species are indeed becoming extinct, only about 0.7% of them are expected to disappear in the next 50 years
Question says → Passage says
Extinct speciesspecies are indeed becoming extinct
Why: NOT GIVEN. The writer only discusses how many species will disappear. New species replacing them is never mentioned.
The trap: The writer plays down extinction, so it feels like he'd agree that losses are made up for. But he never says so; don't fill the gap with your own logic.
Question 31
Answer: YESParagraph 2, sixth sentence
Does the writer agree some pollution really is connected to industrialisation?
most forms of environmental pollution either appear to have been exaggerated, or are transient - associated with the early phases of industrialisation
Question says → Passage says
linked to industrialisationassociated with the early phases of industrialisation
Why: YES. The writer accepts that some pollution is real but temporary, and links it to early industrialisation himself. 'Correctly linked' fits, because this is his own view.
The trap: The word 'exaggerated' in the same sentence pulls people towards NO. But that applies to the other forms of pollution; the 'or' introduces the ones he accepts.
Question 32
Answer: NOParagraph 2, sixth sentence
Would slowing down economic growth be the best idea?
therefore best cured not by restricting economic growth, but by accelerating it
Question says → Passage says
slow down economic growthrestricting economic growth
It would be bestbest cured not by
Why: NO. The writer says the cure is to speed growth up, not hold it back. The statement says the opposite.
Multiple choice
Questions 33-37
How to attack this block: Each question names a paragraph or a clear topic. The distractors use words from the right paragraph (funding, mass media, distortion) but miss the writer's point. Ask what the example is there to show.
Question 33
Answer: CParagraph 4
What worries the writer about scientific research in paragraph 4?
Scientific funding goes mainly to areas with many problems. That may be wise policy, but it will also create an impression that many more potential problems exist
Question says → Passage says
the selection of areas to researchScientific funding goes mainly to areas with many problems
Why: C. The concern is which areas get funded: money goes to problem areas, which makes the world look more problem-filled than it is. That's about selecting areas, a 'lopsidedness'.
The trap: B is tempting because 'funding' is mentioned, but the writer doesn't say there's too little money, only that it goes to one kind of area.
Question 34
Answer: DParagraph 5
Why does the writer quote the World Wide Fund for Nature?
they sometimes overstate their arguments. In 1997, for example, the World Wide Fund for Nature issued a press release entitled: 'Two thirds of the world's forests lost forever'. The truth turns out to be nearer 20%.
Question says → Passage says
exaggerate their claimsoverstate their arguments
Why: D. 'For example' ties the WWF press release to the sentence before it: groups overstate their arguments. Two thirds claimed against a real figure near 20% is the exaggeration.
The trap: A and C both use words from the same paragraph (mass media, money rolling in). Those are the reasons groups exaggerate, not what the quote illustrates.
Question 35
Answer: CParagraph 6, last two sentences
What is the writer's main point about lobby groups in paragraph 6?
A trade organisation arguing for, say, weaker pollution controls is instantly seen as self-interested. Yet a green organisation opposing such a weakening is seen as altruistic
Question says → Passage says
Some receive more criticism than othersinstantly seen as self-interested… seen as altruistic
Why: C. The writer contrasts how people judge two kinds of lobby: trade groups get scepticism, green groups get the benefit of the doubt. That's unequal criticism.
The trap: D is tempting because green issues sound more important, but the writer's point is the opposite: the green group may be 'doing more harm than good', yet it's still trusted.
Question 36
Answer: BParagraph 7, second and third sentences
What does the writer say newspapers aim to do with what they print?
People are clearly more curious about bad news than good. Newspapers and broadcasters are there to provide what the public wants.
Question says → Passage says
meet their readers' expectationsprovide what the public wants
Why: B. The media give the public what it wants, and the public wants bad news. That's meeting readers' expectations.
The trap: D is the strongest distractor: the writer does say this leads to 'distortions of perception'. But that's a side effect, not the papers' intention.
Question 37
Answer: BParagraph 8
What is the writer's view of America's rubbish problem?
all the rubbish America produces through the entire 21st century will still take up only one-12,000th of the area of the entire United States
Question says → Passage says
not as important as we have been led to believePeople worry… Yet… will still take up only one-12,000th
Why: B. People worry about running out of space, but the writer's figure shows a century of waste would use a tiny fraction of the country. The problem is smaller than feared.
The trap: A borrows the population figure ('doubles by 2100'), but that's a worst-case assumption in his calculation, not a claim that waste rises in line with population.
Summary completion (word list A-I)
Questions 38-40
How to attack this block: The first two gaps come from the global warming sentences in paragraph 2, not from the later global warming paragraphs. Several words fit the grammar, so match the meaning: how long it lasts, what kind of response, how pressing the health problem is.
Question 38
Answer: EParagraph 2, near the end
What kind of challenge does the writer admit global warming is?
does appear to be a phenomenon that is going to extend well into our future, but its total impact is unlikely to pose a devastating problem
Question says → Passage says
challengea phenomenon
will not have a catastrophic impactits total impact is unlikely to pose a devastating problem
Why: E, long-term. Something that will 'extend well into our future' is long-term. The second half of the summary sentence ('not… catastrophic') matches 'unlikely to pose a devastating problem', which confirms the place.
The trap: C, expensive, is tempting because the writer later gives a cost of US$5,000 billion. But the 'admits' sentence in paragraph 2 is about how long it lasts, not what it costs.
Question 39
Answer: DParagraph 2, last sentence
In what kind of way do we need to deal with global warming?
A bigger problem may well turn out to be an inappropriate response to it.
Question says → Passage says
if we deal with it in the ___ wayan inappropriate response to it
Why: D, right. The danger is an 'inappropriate' response, so the summary's condition is dealing with it in the appropriate, right way.
The trap: F, usual, fits the grammar, but the writer never says the normal approach is fine. He's arguing that the expected response (cutting emissions) is the wrong one.
Question 40
Answer: IParagraph 11
How does the writer describe the clean water health problem?
the world's single, most pressing health problem: providing universal access to clean drinking water and sanitation
Question says → Passage says
the more ___ health problemmost pressing health problem
Why: I, urgent. 'Pressing' means needing attention now, which is urgent.
The trap: C, expensive, is the near miss: the paragraph is full of costs. But the cost belongs to cutting emissions; the water problem is described as 'pressing'.
E, long-term. People search the later global warming paragraphs and pick 'expensive', but the 'admits' sentence is in paragraph 2, where it will 'extend well into our future'.
B. Newspapers 'provide what the public wants'. Distortion is a side effect, not an intention, so D is wrong.
Words from this passage worth keeping
abundant(Paragraph 2)
available in large quantities
transient(Paragraph 2)
lasting only a short time
disjunction(Paragraph 3)
a gap or mismatch between two things
lopsidedness(Paragraph 4)
being uneven, weighted too much to one side
scepticism(Paragraph 6)
doubt about whether something is true
altruistic(Paragraph 6)
acting to help others rather than yourself
impartial(Paragraph 6)
fair, not favouring any side
adaptation(Paragraph 10)
adjusting to new conditions
Sit this test on Langujet, then come back
The full Cambridge 5 Test 1 reading paper: all three passages, 60 minutes, marked the second you finish with a review of every answer. Already done it? Take it again and see if the same traps still get you.
Cambridge IELTS 5, Test 1, Reading Passage 3. The passage and questions belong to Cambridge University Press and are not reproduced here. We quote short extracts only as evidence for our own commentary, and the answers are published for self-marking. Get the book for the full text, or sit the test on Langujet.
