Solution
Need to find something that directly challenges their environmental benefits.
From passage: "The city is the most environmentally benign form of human settlement. Each city dweller consumes less land, less energy, less water, and produces less pollution"
Author's main argument -> Cities are green because they're resource-efficient and have lower environmental impact per person. The whole passage focuses on environmental benefits like density, energy efficiency, and recycling.
To weaken this -> Need something that shows cities actually harm the environment, not just create social or economic problems.
Option Analysis:
š“ Option 1 -> irrelevant -> Disease spread is a health issue, not environmental. Even if people get sick from sorting rubbish, this doesn't challenge whether cities use less energy or produce less pollution per person.
š¢ Option 2 -> correct -> Directly attacks the core argument. If high density increases CO2 and global warming, then cities are actually harming the environment, not helping it. This completely contradicts the "environmentally benign" claim.
š“ Option 3 -> irrelevant -> Crime is a social problem, not environmental. Violence doesn't relate to whether cities are "green" or use resources efficiently.
š“ Option 4 -> irrelevant -> Economic costs don't equal environmental impact. Higher utility bills don't mean cities aren't still more resource-efficient than suburbs.
The key confusion students have -> Mixing up different types of problems. Remember: "greenness" = environmental impact only. Social problems (crime, disease) and economic problems (costs) are separate issues that don't challenge environmental claims.
More from this set:
Question 15