Correct Option (B)
The passage critically evaluates the current policy responses to urban pollution, characterizing them as "drastic actions" and "arbitrary bans." It highlights their ineffectiveness, stating that "even then the air is not clean" and that certain measures "will not make any difference." The passage explicitly advocates for a shift towards "scientific and reliable information about the source of pollutants on a continuing basis and the technologies that will work to reduce pollution from them." Therefore, option (B) accurately encapsulates the passage's central argument: that impulsive, unscientific measures are insufficient, and a data-driven, evidence-based strategy is required for effective pollution control.
Incorrect Options:
- Option (A) Arbitrary curbs on vehicles to reduce pollution are difficult to implement. The passage primarily focuses on the ineffectiveness and lack of scientific basis of arbitrary measures, rather than their implementation challenges. While such curbs might be difficult to implement, this is not the core implication conveyed.
- Option (C) A heavy penalty should be enforced on those driving without periodic pollution tests. The passage does not propose penalties as a solution. Instead, it emphasizes the need for scientific information and technological interventions. Furthermore, it criticizes arbitrary bans even on vehicles that have passed mandated tests, indicating a focus beyond mere enforcement of existing test requirements.
- Option (D) In the absence of laws to deal with the problems of pollution, administration tends to make arbitrary decisions. The passage does not suggest a lack of laws. It describes existing policy actions but critiques their arbitrary nature and ineffectiveness, implying a problem with the approach to policy-making and implementation rather than a legal vacuum.