Correct Option (B)
The passage highlights that while demand-side measures, such as behavioural changes by individuals and households, are crucial for achieving net-zero carbon emissions, these changes are not self-sufficient. It explicitly states that such reductions would require companies and governments to provide incentives through supply-side investments. These incentives aim to make low-carbon options more affordable and accessible, thereby enabling and encouraging low-carbon behaviour. Therefore, the central idea conveyed is that incentivizing people is fundamental to fostering low-carbon behaviour.
Incorrect Options:
-
Option (A): The passage states that demand-side measures, including household emissions reductions, might achieve "at best, half the reduction." This contradicts the assertion that moving to net-zero carbon is possible *only* by the reduction in household emissions, as other measures would clearly be required for the remaining half.
-
Option (C): While the passage mentions making low-carbon options "cheaper and more widely available," this is presented as a means to provide incentives and facilitate behavioural change. The availability of cheaper goods and services is a mechanism to achieve the broader goal of encouraging low-carbon behaviour, not the central idea itself.
-
Option (D): The passage discusses "incentives" broadly from "companies and governments" to encourage low-carbon choices. It does not specifically advocate for subsidies targeted at manufacturing industries. This option introduces a specific policy recommendation that is not the central theme of the passage, which focuses on the interplay between incentives and behavioural change.