The Practical Limits of Sustainable Consumption
About this practice test
Read three C1 texts about the practical limits of sustainable consumption: a reuse centre’s findings, a residents’ buying cooperative and a community discussion of barriers to greener choices.
What you’ll practice
Finding detail
Locate specific information and evidence.
Interpreting ideas
Connect main points and inferences.
Evaluating arguments
Assess claims, evidence, and limitations.
What to expect:
21 questions with explanations to review after submission.
Study the questions and tasks
Work through the material below, or start the interactive practice above to complete an attempt. Try the exercises before opening any answer or transcript sections, then use them to review your work.
- Practice level
- C1. Try this level if you can follow the instructions and understand most of the language; choose an earlier level if you need more support.
- Question formats
- Multiple choice, True / False / Not Given, Cloze (dropdown), Short answer, Matching
How to approach this practice
Read the passage for its main idea, then return to the relevant sentence or paragraph for each question. Base answers on the passage.
The Bramble Vale Exchange and Its Limits
In Bramble Vale, a dense district on the edge of a mid-sized city, a small reuse centre opened in a former chemist shop with an ambition that sounded simple and was harder in practice: keep household items in use for longer and persuade residents that the cleanest purchase is sometimes no purchase at all. The scheme, called the Exchange, accepted unwanted goods, cleaned and checked them, and lent or sold them at very low prices. Its coordinator, Maya Lewis, insisted from the start that success should not be measured by the number of visitors alone. A busy Saturday, she said, could still produce little environmental benefit if most donations were too broken, too specialised, or too bulky to find a second life. Over ten months, the centre recorded 1,180 incoming items. Of these, 670 were reissued directly or after minor repair, 210 were stripped for parts or downcycled, and 300 were sent on to ordinary recycling or disposal. The clearest demand came from items people needed only briefly or infrequently: steam irons, drills, children’s shoes, cake tins and ladder parts. Goods with a narrow fit, such as a specialist vacuum hose or an unusually large saucepan lid, often waited on the shelves until staff finally admitted that storage space mattered as much as generosity. The report suggests that the scheme worked best when it met a practical need at the exact moment that need appeared. Residents were more willing to borrow a tool for one afternoon than to rearrange a cupboard around an object they might use once in a year. That was one reason the Exchange introduced an online reservation page and an anonymous ‘request wall’, where people could ask for items without having to explain their circumstances face to face. Uptake among families grew after that change, although staff still noticed a slow but steady reluctance among some older residents to take home goods that had belonged to strangers. The numbers were encouraging, but they also exposed the limits of reuse as a consumption strategy. In follow-up interviews, several participants said they bought fewer duplicate kitchen items, yet their overall spending on new goods changed only a little. Some simply replaced one kind of purchase with another, while others kept buying because they lacked repair skills or lived too far away to walk to the centre. The report therefore avoids claiming that the Exchange cut consumption across the board; instead, it says the scheme mainly redirected demand and delayed replacement. A smaller repair corner inside the centre gave a clearer picture of what could be saved for longer. Kettles that had gone to the repair table often lasted about eighteen months beyond their expected replacement date, largely because the parts were ordinary and cheap. Vacuum cleaners were less promising, not because demand was absent but because the relevant parts were no longer stocked by the manufacturers. The report uses that contrast to argue that product design can make reuse easier or almost impossible: if a machine is sealed, fragile and model-specific, community repair has to fight the product itself. The final conclusion is cautious rather than gloomy. The Exchange appears to be a useful gateway for households that want to waste less, but it is not a complete answer to overconsumption. Its strongest results came from standardised, durable items that were easy to store and easy to pass on; its weakest came from awkward, oversized or highly specific goods. The author also notes a methodological limit: the centre tracked items it handled, not the full shopping habits of every resident, so the report can show patterns of use and non-use more confidently than it can prove causal savings. On that basis, it recommends wider measures such as better repairable design, longer warranties and local purchasing rules, because a neighbourhood scheme can stretch objects further but cannot, by itself, redesign the market that produces them.
Briar House Buying Club
When Mara moved into Briar House, a narrow apartment block above a baker's shop, she found that five neighbours were already comparing shopping lists on the landing every Friday. They were not trying to live like a commune. The aim was simpler: buy a few goods together, waste less, and avoid carrying home the same heavy packets separately. The idea began after the group noticed how much packaging ended up in the shared bin each week. Mara, who kept the first notes, said that most people joined for convenience and the chance of small savings, not because they expected to become spotless environmental heroes. At the start, the cooperative focused on bulk staples: rice, flour, soap, tea, and lentils. Leon arranged the orders with a wholesaler on the edge of town, then collected cash and recorded the payments in a shared ledger. Goods arrived in one van at a single delivery slot in the basement, where the residents measured them into jars and tins. The arrangement worked because these items were predictable and did not spoil. It also cut a surprising amount of plastic, although the savings were uneven; the cheaper the item already was, the less dramatic the effect. Problems appeared when the group tried to widen the list. Priya had an allergy to nuts, two households wanted organic vegetables, and one family cooked for a teenager who ate far more pasta than anyone else. They agreed on a narrow set of common items and left the rest to individual choice. The biggest irritation came from fresh produce. In winter, they abandoned strawberries after three deliveries in a row arrived soft and half spoiled, and the members admitted that a morally attractive purchase was not always a sensible one. Another limit was time. Leon, who was patient with figures, spent Tuesday evenings checking orders, chasing missing payments, and correcting mistakes in the spreadsheet. If one neighbour forgot to collect a bag of onions or was away when the delivery arrived, someone else had to move it, mark it, and remember it until the next meeting. By the second month, the members realised that the hours spent keeping the system neat could easily exceed the small savings it created. For them, the cooperative only made sense if everyone accepted mild inefficiency as part of the bargain. That recognition changed the way Mara described success. The co-op did not transform habits across the building, and it never touched the larger patterns that mattered most, such as heating choices, car use, or how often people bought meat. Instead, it made a few ordinary purchases less wasteful and less expensive. The gains came mainly from repeat purchases: things people bought over and over without much thought. Seen that way, the project was useful, but only as a practical compromise, not as proof that consumer life can be made fully sustainable by goodwill alone. By the end of the year, the residents had stopped pretending that the cooperative was a complete answer. They kept it for the products that were easy to standardise and dropped the ones that demanded too much coordination. Priya summed up the lesson neatly: sustainable consumption needs infrastructure and easy defaults, not just better intentions. The group had not become purer, and that was not its real achievement. It had learned where shared effort works, where it breaks, and why the most responsible choice is sometimes the one that is simply manageable.
Six Voices on Why Green Choices Stall
Paragraph 1On a wet Thursday evening, six participants met at North Wharf Community Centre to discuss a question that often sounds simple and usually is not: why do people who care about the environment still fall back on ordinary habits? The organiser, a local journalist named Rina, had asked each guest to bring one constraint rather than one solution. By the end of the conversation, it was clear that the obstacle was not a lack of goodwill. It was the way daily life keeps turning good intentions into trade-offs.
Paragraph 2Mara, who manages a household on a tight budget, began with price. In her view, many shops present sustainable products as easy swaps, yet the word easy hides an awkward truth: the greener item often costs more at the till before any future saving appears. She can justify a longer-lasting bulb or a refill bottle once in a while, but not a weekly basket where every item asks for a small extra payment. She also pointed out that discount outlets sometimes stock only one eco-choice, so the shopper pays a premium not out of taste but out of necessity. Imran, who works irregular shifts and helps care for two children, said time was the next barrier. Sustainable behaviour, he argued, is often imagined as if it came with spare hours attached: research the labels, walk to the refill shop, compare repair services, wait in for a parcel, then carry everything home. Each task is modest on its own, but together they fill the gaps in a normal week.
Paragraph 3Celia, who rents a flat above a bakery, shifted the discussion from money and time to housing. She would like to dry clothes outside, but the landlord refuses to fix a line on the shared wall. She would also like to buy in bulk, yet the kitchen cupboard is too shallow and the freezer too small. Most of all, she said, renters cannot decide on insulation, solar panels, or even where the sockets should go. Noor, a product designer, warned against treating labels as if they were neutral facts. Low carbon, biodegradable, recyclable, local, fair: the words sound precise, but they are not always comparable, and they are rarely complete. A product may be recyclable in one place and useless in another; a claim may describe the last stage while hiding a long transport chain before it. Noor did not dismiss labels altogether. She said they are useful when they are modest, but misleading when shoppers are expected to turn fragments into expertise. In her view, the problem is not that people are lazy; it is that the evidence is partial and the burden of interpretation is too large.
Paragraph 4Ben, who helps run a school catering contract, argued that no single household can solve the problem alone if institutions keep acting separately. One parent can bring a metal bottle and another can avoid cling film, but a lunch service still depends on what the caterer buys, what the school requests, and what the contract permits. He described a case where parents wanted less disposable packaging, yet the supplier only changed when several schools asked together. Tessa, who runs a small repair café, added that repair is praised in public but discouraged in design. She said she runs a small repair café and that many products are sealed shut, screw heads are hidden, and replacement parts are hard to obtain. She argued that the most frustrating thing is not that people refuse to mend objects, but that the objects are built as if mending were an odd hobby rather than a normal part of ownership.
Paragraph 5Sustainable consumption, the group concluded, is possible, but only if the systems around it stop making the responsible choice feel like an act of persistence. Price, time, housing, information, coordination, and repair all matter, and they often matter together. When any one of them is ignored, advice sounds generous while life remains unchanged.
-
Question 1 · Multiple choice
Choose all the correct answers.
Choose TWO statements that the report supports about why the Exchange worked best.
Return to the passage, recording or visual- It focused on standardised, durable items that were easy to store and pass on.
- It met a practical need at the moment the need appeared.
- It mainly encouraged residents to replace ordinary goods with specialised ones.
- It achieved its best results with items that were difficult to store and pass on.
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- It focused on standardised, durable items that were easy to store and pass on.; It met a practical need at the moment the need appeared.
The report says the scheme worked best when it met a practical need at the exact moment it appeared, and when items were standardised, durable, easy to store and easy to pass on. The other choices reverse or misrepresent the report’s findings.
The report suggests that the scheme worked best when it met a practical need at the exact moment that need appeared
Its strongest results came from standardised, durable items that were easy to store and easy to pass on
-
Question 2 · True / False / Not Given
Decide whether the statement agrees with the information. Choose Not Given when the text or recording does not provide the information.
The clearest demand came from items needed every day.
Return to the passage, recording or visual- True
- False
- Not Given
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- False
False. The report says the clearest demand came from items people needed only briefly or infrequently, not items needed every day.
The clearest demand came from items people needed only briefly or infrequently: steam irons, drills, children’s shoes, cake tins and ladder parts
True: The report points in the opposite direction.
False: This contradicts the list of items that had the clearest demand.
Not Given: The report does give enough information to judge this.
-
Question 3 · True / False / Not Given
Decide whether the statement agrees with the information. Choose Not Given when the text or recording does not provide the information.
Kettles lasted longer because the parts needed for repair were ordinary and cheap.
Return to the passage, recording or visual- True
- False
- Not Given
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- True
True. The report states that kettles lasted about eighteen months beyond their expected replacement date largely because the parts were ordinary and cheap.
Kettles that had gone to the repair table often lasted about eighteen months beyond their expected replacement date, largely because the parts were ordinary and cheap
True: This matches the report's explanation for the kettles' longer life.
False: The report says the opposite cause.
Not Given: The reason is stated clearly in the passage.
-
Question 4 · True / False / Not Given
Decide whether the statement agrees with the information. Choose Not Given when the text or recording does not provide the information.
The centre recorded more items that were reused or repaired than items that were recycled or discarded.
Return to the passage, recording or visual- True
- False
- Not Given
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- True
True. The report gives 670 items as reissued directly or after minor repair, compared with 300 sent on to ordinary recycling or disposal. The statement matches that comparison.
Of these, 670 were reissued directly or after minor repair, 210 were stripped for parts or downcycled, and 300 were sent on to ordinary recycling or disposal
True: The numbers in the report support this comparison.
False: The report gives the opposite balance.
Not Given: The figures are stated directly, so this is not the right choice.
-
Question 5 · True / False / Not Given
Decide whether the statement agrees with the information. Choose Not Given when the text or recording does not provide the information.
The author predicts the Exchange will be expanded to every district next year.
Return to the passage, recording or visual- True
- False
- Not Given
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- Not Given
Not Given. The conclusion recommends wider measures such as better design, longer warranties and local purchasing rules, but it does not predict a timetable for expansion of the Exchange itself.
On that basis, it recommends wider measures such as better repairable design, longer warranties and local purchasing rules
True: The report makes no such prediction.
False: The passage does not directly deny expansion; it simply does not mention it.
Not Given: No next-year expansion plan is stated.
-
Question 6 · True / False / Not Given
Decide whether the statement agrees with the information. Choose Not Given when the text or recording does not provide the information.
The report says the Exchange offered home delivery for every item.
Return to the passage, recording or visual- True
- False
- Not Given
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- Not Given
Not Given. The report discusses people living too far away to walk to the centre, but it never says the Exchange offered delivery, let alone for every item. That service is not stated.
Some simply replaced one kind of purchase with another, while others kept buying because they lacked repair skills or lived too far away to walk to the centre
True: There is no statement that this service existed.
False: The report does not contradict delivery; it simply does not mention it.
Not Given: The passage never says whether delivery was offered.
-
Question 7 · True / False / Not Given
Decide whether the statement agrees with the information. Choose Not Given when the text or recording does not provide the information.
The report says vacuum cleaners were easier to repair than kettles.
Return to the passage, recording or visual- True
- False
- Not Given
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- False
False. The report says vacuum cleaners were less promising because the relevant parts were no longer stocked by the manufacturers, while kettles benefited from ordinary and cheap parts.
Vacuum cleaners were less promising, not because demand was absent but because the relevant parts were no longer stocked by the manufacturers
True: The report says the opposite of this.
False: This contradicts the report's comparison with kettles.
Not Given: The passage does compare the two items directly.
-
Question 8 · Cloze (dropdown)
Choose the correct option for each blank.
Complete the summary below. Choose NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS from the passage for each answer. The cooperative began by ordering 1___ from a 2___. Leon recorded the payments in a 3___. Goods arrived in one van at a single delivery slot in the 4___. This reduced 5___, and the arrangement worked because the items were 6___ and did not spoil.
Return to the passage, recording or visualChoices for blank 1
- shopping bags
- fresh produce
- personal items
- bulk staples
Choices for blank 2
- wholesaler
- supermarket
- baker
- distributor
Choices for blank 3
- delivery note
- shared ledger
- weekly rota
- receipt book
Choices for blank 4
- attic
- kitchen
- landing
- basement
Choices for blank 5
- spoilage
- money
- plastic
- time
Choices for blank 6
- predictable
- seasonal
- portable
- cheap
Check answers and explanations
- Blank 1
- bulk staples
- Blank 2
- wholesaler
- Blank 3
- shared ledger
- Blank 4
- basement
- Blank 5
- plastic
- Blank 6
- predictable
Gap 1: The cooperative began with bulk staples, as the passage lists rice, flour, soap, tea and lentils as its first focus. Gap 2: Leon arranged the orders with a wholesaler on the edge of town. Gap 3: Leon recorded the payments in a shared ledger. A ledger is a book or record of financial transactions. Gap 4: The goods arrived at a single delivery slot in the basement. Gap 5: Buying together cut a surprising amount of plastic. Gap 6: The arrangement worked because the goods were predictable and did not spoil.
At the start, the cooperative focused on bulk staples: rice, flour, soap, tea, and lentils. Leon arranged the orders with a wholesaler on the edge of town, then collected cash and recorded the payments in a shared ledger
The arrangement worked because these items were predictable and did not spoil. It also cut a surprising amount of plastic
shopping bags: Incorrect: the passage is about goods, not bags.
fresh produce: Incorrect: fresh produce is discussed later as a problem, not as the initial focus.
personal items: Incorrect: the group began with shared staples, not individual possessions.
bulk staples: Correct: the passage says the cooperative focused on bulk staples.
wholesaler: Correct: Leon arranged the orders with a wholesaler.
supermarket: Incorrect: the passage names a wholesaler, not a supermarket.
baker: Incorrect: the baker's shop is only where the building sits.
distributor: Incorrect: that is too general; the source specifically says wholesaler.
delivery note: Incorrect: the passage does not mention a delivery note; it says shared ledger.
shared ledger: Correct: Leon recorded the payments in a shared ledger.
weekly rota: Incorrect: the text discusses tracking payments, not a rota.
receipt book: Incorrect: the source uses shared ledger rather than receipt book.
attic: Incorrect: the passage never mentions an attic.
kitchen: Incorrect: kitchens are not named as the delivery place.
landing: Incorrect: the landing is where shopping lists were compared.
basement: Correct: goods arrived at a delivery slot in the basement.
spoilage: Incorrect: spoilage is discussed later with strawberries.
money: Incorrect: the passage says plastic was reduced, not money.
plastic: Correct: the arrangement cut a surprising amount of plastic.
time: Incorrect: time becomes a later problem, not the reduced item here.
predictable: Correct: the passage says the items were predictable and did not spoil.
seasonal: Incorrect: seasonal is not the reason given in the passage.
portable: Incorrect: the source does not describe the items as portable.
cheap: Incorrect: the passage does not say the arrangement worked because the items were cheap.
-
Question 9 · Short answer
Write a short answer to the question.
Write NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS AND/OR A NUMBER from the passage. How often did the neighbours compare their shopping lists?
Return to the passage, recording or visualCheck answers and explanations
- Accepted answers
- every Friday
The passage says they compared shopping lists 'every Friday'. This directly answers the frequency question; 'Friday' alone is not enough because it does not state the repeated interval.
five neighbours were already comparing shopping lists on the landing every Friday
-
Question 10 · Short answer
Write a short answer to the question.
Write NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS AND/OR A NUMBER from the passage. What did Leon use to record the payments?
Return to the passage, recording or visualCheck answers and explanations
- Accepted answers
- shared ledger / ledger / a shared ledger
Leon recorded the payments in a shared ledger. 'Ledger' and 'a shared ledger' are also acceptable names for the record used.
Leon arranged the orders with a wholesaler on the edge of town, then collected cash and recorded the payments in a shared ledger
-
Question 11 · Short answer
Write a short answer to the question.
Write NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS AND/OR A NUMBER from the passage. Which fruit did the group stop buying after the deliveries arrived soft and half spoiled?
Return to the passage, recording or visualCheck answers and explanations
- Accepted answers
- strawberries
The text specifically names strawberries. 'Fruit' is too broad because the passage identifies one item they abandoned.
In winter, they abandoned strawberries after three deliveries in a row arrived soft and half spoiled
-
Question 12 · Short answer
Write a short answer to the question.
Write NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS AND/OR A NUMBER from the passage. What could easily exceed the small savings it created?
Return to the passage, recording or visualCheck answers and explanations
- Accepted answers
- the hours spent / hours spent
The passage says 'the hours spent keeping the system neat' could exceed the savings. Because the answer must stay brief, 'the hours spent' is the shortest source-based phrase that fits.
the hours spent keeping the system neat could easily exceed the small savings it created
-
Question 13 · Short answer
Write a short answer to the question.
Write NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS AND/OR A NUMBER from the passage. What kind of inefficiency did the members accept as part of the bargain?
Return to the passage, recording or visualCheck answers and explanations
- Accepted answers
- mild inefficiency
They accepted 'mild inefficiency'. The passage does not suggest they embraced inefficiency in general, only a limited amount as part of the arrangement.
everyone accepted mild inefficiency as part of the bargain
-
Question 14 · Short answer
Write a short answer to the question.
Write NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS AND/OR A NUMBER from the passage. Besides infrastructure, what did Priya say sustainable consumption needs?
Return to the passage, recording or visualCheck answers and explanations
- Accepted answers
- easy defaults
Priya says sustainable consumption needs 'easy defaults' as well as infrastructure. 'Better intentions' is explicitly rejected as sufficient by the passage.
sustainable consumption needs infrastructure and easy defaults, not just better intentions
-
Question 15 · Matching
Match each item to the correct choice.
Match each statement to the participant who made it. Choose the correct letter.
Return to the passage, recording or visualAnswer choices
- Rina
- Mara
- Ben
- Tessa
- Noor
- Imran
- Celia
Items
- the participant who says the green option often costs more before any saving appears
- the participant who says extra research, trips and waiting for parcels make sustainable habits hard to fit into the week
- the participant who argues that renters cannot alter walls, sockets or energy systems
- the participant who warns that labels give fragments that shoppers must interpret themselves
- the participant who thinks schools and caterers must change together if packaging is to improve
- the participant who says repair is obstructed because products are designed to be hard to open
Check answers and explanations
- 1. the participant who says the green option often costs more before any saving appears
- Mara
- 2. the participant who says extra research, trips and waiting for parcels make sustainable habits hard to fit into the week
- Imran
- 3. the participant who argues that renters cannot alter walls, sockets or energy systems
- Celia
- 4. the participant who warns that labels give fragments that shoppers must interpret themselves
- Noor
- 5. the participant who thinks schools and caterers must change together if packaging is to improve
- Ben
- 6. the participant who says repair is obstructed because products are designed to be hard to open
- Tessa
Match 1: Mara identifies price as a barrier, explaining that greener products often cost more before future savings appear. Match 2: Imran focuses on time, listing research, journeys, repairs and parcel collection as demands on a normal week. Match 3: Celia discusses housing restrictions and says renters cannot decide on insulation, solar panels or sockets. Match 4: Noor warns that labels are not always comparable or complete, leaving shoppers to interpret partial evidence. Match 5: Ben says schools and suppliers need coordinated action because one household cannot change an institutional lunch service alone. Match 6: Tessa says repair is obstructed by products with sealed cases, hidden screws and hard-to-obtain replacement parts.
the greener item often costs more at the till before any future saving appears
Most of all, she said, renters cannot decide on insulation, solar panels, or even where the sockets should go
One parent can bring a metal bottle and another can avoid cling film, but a lunch service still depends on what the caterer buys, what the school requests, and what the contract permits. He described a case where parents wanted less disposable packaging, yet the supplier only changed when several schools asked together. Tessa, who runs a small repair café, added that repair is praised in public but discouraged in design. She said she runs a small repair café and that many products are sealed shut, screw heads are hidden, and replacement parts are hard to obtain
-
Question 16 · True / False / Not Given
Decide whether the statement agrees with the information. Choose Not Given when the text or recording does not provide the information.
Mara says discount outlets always offer several eco-friendly products.
Return to the passage, recording or visual- True
- False
- Not Given
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- False
False. Mara says discount outlets sometimes stock only one eco-choice, so the statement reverses her point by claiming they always offer several. Not Given is wrong because the passage gives a direct contrast to that claim.
discount outlets sometimes stock only one eco-choice
True: Incorrect: the passage says some outlets stock only one eco-choice, not that they always offer several.
False: Correct: Mara’s comment points to limited choice, not to always having several options.
Not Given: Incorrect: the text gives enough information to judge the claim, and it points the other way.
-
Question 17 · True / False / Not Given
Decide whether the statement agrees with the information. Choose Not Given when the text or recording does not provide the information.
Celia says renters cannot choose insulation or solar panels for the place they live in.
Return to the passage, recording or visual- True
- False
- Not Given
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- True
True. Celia explicitly says renters cannot decide on insulation or solar panels, so the statement matches her view. False would reverse the meaning, and Not Given is wrong because the point is stated clearly.
renters cannot decide on insulation, solar panels, or even where the sockets should go
True: Correct: Celia directly says renters cannot make those decisions.
False: Incorrect: the passage says the opposite, that renters cannot choose them.
Not Given: Incorrect: Celia states this limitation directly.
-
Question 18 · True / False / Not Given
Decide whether the statement agrees with the information. Choose Not Given when the text or recording does not provide the information.
The discussion was held at North Wharf Community Centre.
Return to the passage, recording or visual- True
- False
- Not Given
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- True
True. The opening sentence states the venue directly. False would contradict that sentence, and Not Given is wrong because the location is explicitly named.
six participants met at North Wharf Community Centre
True: Correct: the venue is stated directly in the opening sentence.
False: Incorrect: the passage explicitly says the meeting was there.
Not Given: Incorrect: the location is clearly given, so this is not left unstated.
-
Question 19 · True / False / Not Given
Decide whether the statement agrees with the information. Choose Not Given when the text or recording does not provide the information.
The participants agreed that opening more refill shops would solve the problem.
Return to the passage, recording or visual- True
- False
- Not Given
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- Not Given
Not Given. Imran mentions the refill shop as one more task in a busy week, but the passage never says the group agreed on opening more refill shops or that such a plan would solve the issue. False would require a contradiction that is not present.
walk to the refill shop, compare repair services, wait in for a parcel, then carry everything home
Sustainable consumption, the group concluded, is possible, but only if the systems around it stop making the responsible choice feel like an act of persistence
True: Incorrect: no such agreement is reported.
False: Incorrect: the passage does not contradict the idea with a different group decision; it simply does not mention one.
Not Given: Correct: the text mentions a refill shop, but not any agreement to open more of them.
-
Question 20 · True / False / Not Given
Decide whether the statement agrees with the information. Choose Not Given when the text or recording does not provide the information.
Tessa runs a shop that sells replacement parts.
Return to the passage, recording or visual- True
- False
- Not Given
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- Not Given
Not Given. The passage says Tessa runs a repair café and that replacement parts are hard to obtain, but it never says she sells those parts. False would require a contradiction, which is not present.
Tessa, who runs a small repair café, added that repair is praised in public but discouraged in design
replacement parts are hard to obtain
True: Incorrect: the passage does not say she sells replacement parts.
False: Incorrect: the text does not contradict the statement directly; it simply does not state it.
Not Given: Correct: Tessa is linked to a repair café, but not to a shop selling parts.
-
Question 21 · True / False / Not Given
Decide whether the statement agrees with the information. Choose Not Given when the text or recording does not provide the information.
Noor believes labels provide complete and comparable evidence.
Return to the passage, recording or visual- True
- False
- Not Given
Check answers and explanations
- Answer
- False
False. Noor says the words are not always comparable and are rarely complete, so the statement reverses her view. Not Given is wrong because she clearly evaluates the labels and finds them limited.
they are not always comparable, and they are rarely complete
the evidence is partial and the burden of interpretation is too large
True: Incorrect: Noor argues the opposite, that the labels are limited.
False: Correct: she says the evidence is partial, incomplete and not always comparable.
Not Given: Incorrect: Noor gives a clear opinion about the quality of the evidence.
What to review next
Find the words that support each answer. For a mistake, compare the question with the evidence and identify the detail or inference you missed.
A focused practice result shows how you did on these tasks. Use several activities across skills to decide what to study next; one practice score does not certify an overall CEFR level.
Before you practise: a worked example
Look for evidence in the text. Separate what the writer says from what you already know about the topic.
The library normally closes at six, but on Fridays it stays open until eight. When does it close on Friday?
The answer is eight. But introduces an exception to the normal closing time, so the first time mentioned is not the answer.
This teaching example is separate from the scored questions. After your test, compare any mistakes with the explanation and revisit the topic before trying again.