UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

The IPCC AR6 Synthesis clearly states that the remaining carbon budget for 1.5°C is very small and shrinking quickly. It emphasises that rapid, deep and sustained emission cuts in the 2020s are essential to keep this temperature goal within reach. Early action reduces the chances of overshoot, lowers long-term costs and avoids locking in high-carbon infrastructure. Therefore, the option that highlights urgent and strong mitigation in this decade captures the heart of the report’s message.

Option A:
This option is correct because it directly reflects the wording used by the IPCC about rapid, deep and sustained cuts. It recognises that mitigation must happen now, not at some distant future date. It also links the scale and speed of emission reductions to the 1.5°C limit, which is central to the report.

Option B:
This option is incorrect because delaying major emission reductions until after 2050 would make 1.5°C practically unattainable. The report warns that postponement increases costs and risks of irreversible impacts. Therefore, it contradicts the urgency stressed in AR6.

Option C:
This option overemphasises lifestyle changes and ignores the need for structural shifts in energy, transport and land use. The report stresses that both demand-side and supply-side transformations are needed. Hence, it is incomplete and not the best answer.

Option D:
This option wrongly suggests that mitigation no longer matters. AR6 repeatedly states that every fraction of a degree of avoided warming reduces impacts and risks. So, claiming mitigation has no effect is directly opposed to the scientific findings.