Reading Lab

IELTS Academic Reading Practice Pack 41

A full 60-minute Academic Reading mock with three source-grounded passages, 40 questions, answer key coverage, and doctrine QA traceability.

Question count

Time allowed

60 min

Passages

Academic ReadingFull MockIELTS PracticeQA Approved

Exam panel

You have 60 minutes including answer transfer time. Submit once at the end or let the timer finish the exam automatically.

Time remaining

60:00

0 / 40 answers filled

Write only what the question requires. One extra word can still lose the mark.

After submission, you will see your raw score, estimated Academic Reading band, and the correct answers for every question.

What this reading pack trains

This set is built around can reflective cities solve urban heat, seagrass meadows and the problem of hidden value, the archaeology of early adhesives with 8 official IELTS Reading task types spread across three passages.

IELTS Academic Reading Practice Pack 41 is designed as a full Academic Reading simulation, not just a passage archive. The three texts move from a more accessible opener into denser, more inference-heavy material so the burden rises in the same direction students expect in a real test.

Across this pack, you work through roughly 2,397 words on The Archaeology of Early Adhesives; Seagrass Meadows and the Problem of Hidden Value; Can Reflective Cities Solve Urban Heat?. That mix matters because IELTS Reading rewards candidates who can adjust between topic vocabulary, paraphrase recognition, and question-discipline rather than relying on one search habit.

Use this pack when you want one serious timed session, then review every wrong answer against the exact trap type. A strong post-test habit is to check whether the miss came from rushing, weak paraphrase tracking, unstable Not Given logic, or ignoring the word-limit instruction.

Inside the pack

Use the pack as one timed attempt, then return for deliberate review.

Domains

can reflective cities solve urban heat · seagrass meadows and the problem of hidden value · the archaeology of early adhesives

Question types

Matching Headings · Matching Information · Matching Sentence Endings · Multiple Choice · Sentence Completion · Summary Completion · True/False/Not Given · Yes/No/Not Given

If you want more full mocks after this one, go back to the Reading pack library. If you need a broader exam routine, pair one reading session with Listening practice or IELTS Writing repair work.

Passage 1

The Archaeology of Early Adhesives

An academic IELTS passage on the archaeology of early adhesives, opening with stone tools often attract attention because their edges survive for tens of thousands of years, but the less visible materials that held those....

A.A. Stone tools often attract attention because their edges survive for tens of thousands of years, but the less visible materials that held those tools together can be just as informative. Among the most discussed examples is birch tar, a dark adhesive made by heating birch bark in conditions with limited oxygen. Small pieces of this material have been found at Palaeolithic sites, where they appear to have helped attach stone flakes to wooden handles or shafts. Because handles usually decay, the adhesive may be the only surviving sign that a tool was once part of a more complex object. It also reminds archaeologists that a tool was rarely only a piece of stone. A scraper or point might have depended on a handle, binding material, repair routine, and knowledge of when a joint would fail under pressure. These hidden parts are important because they show how people managed force, grip, balance, and portability. A blade without a handle may cut, but a blade joined to wood can become a planned instrument with a different range of uses.

B.B. Birch tar matters because it is not a raw material that can simply be picked up from the ground. It has to be manufactured. Bark contains compounds that change when heated, and the useful tar must be collected without burning the whole material into ash. Experiments have shown that several production methods are possible. Some are relatively simple, using a small fire and bark placed close to embers. Others require more controlled arrangements, such as heating bark under sediment or in a covered pit so that smoke and volatile substances are trapped long enough to form a sticky residue. The difference is not only technical. A covered arrangement may require preparation before the fire is lit, protection from excess oxygen during heating, and patience before the material can be recovered.

C.C. This variety of possible methods has made the archaeological interpretation cautious. If a tar fragment could have been produced by an easy campfire technique, it would provide weaker evidence for planning than if it came from a process that required careful temperature control, preparation of a pit, and delayed retrieval. Researchers therefore compare archaeological samples with experimental tars made under different conditions. Chemical traces, surface structure, and impurities can sometimes indicate whether the material formed in open-air, partly covered, or underground settings. Such comparisons do not produce a simple label, because ancient residues may be small, weathered, or contaminated by soil. Even so, they make it possible to discuss probability rather than merely assume that all early adhesives were made in the simplest way.

D.D. The debate is especially important for discussions of Neanderthal technology. Finds from sites associated with Neanderthals suggest that they used birch tar before the widespread appearance of many later symbolic artefacts. Some scholars argue that this shows an ability to manage a multi-stage task, not merely to strike flakes from stone. Others advise restraint, noting that a single material cannot prove the full range of a group’s cognitive abilities. The stronger conclusion is narrower but still significant: adhesive use joined stone, wood, fire, and plant knowledge into one practical system. It required users to think about how different materials behaved together, and it may have allowed tools to be repaired or redesigned rather than discarded after a handle loosened.

E.E. For archaeologists, the value of early adhesives lies partly in this connection between invisible skill and surviving residue. A black lump only a few centimetres wide can imply decisions about bark selection, heating conditions, tool design, and repair. It also shifts attention away from the finished stone edge alone. The history of technology is not simply a sequence of harder blades or sharper points; it is also a history of joining materials, solving practical problems, and making objects whose most fragile parts have usually disappeared. In that sense, early adhesives are modest but powerful evidence. They preserve traces of planning that would otherwise be lost with wood, fibre, skin, and other perishable parts of ancient equipment. They also encourage a more cautious form of interpretation: rather than asking whether one find proves intelligence, researchers ask what chain of practical actions the material required and how reliably those actions could be repeated.

Matching Headings

Questions 1-5

The reading passage has five paragraphs, A-E. Choose the correct heading for each paragraph from the list of headings below.

1. Paragraph A ______

i. The limits of what one material can prove
ii. Why adhesive evidence survives when handles do not
iii. How production method affects interpretation
iv. A substance that had to be manufactured
v. Adhesives as evidence of connected technologies
vi. The decline of stone tools
vii. Chemical tests that replace excavation

2. Paragraph B ______

i. The limits of what one material can prove
ii. Why adhesive evidence survives when handles do not
iii. How production method affects interpretation
iv. A substance that had to be manufactured
v. Adhesives as evidence of connected technologies
vi. The decline of stone tools
vii. Chemical tests that replace excavation

3. Paragraph C ______

i. The limits of what one material can prove
ii. Why adhesive evidence survives when handles do not
iii. How production method affects interpretation
iv. A substance that had to be manufactured
v. Adhesives as evidence of connected technologies
vi. The decline of stone tools
vii. Chemical tests that replace excavation

4. Paragraph D ______

i. The limits of what one material can prove
ii. Why adhesive evidence survives when handles do not
iii. How production method affects interpretation
iv. A substance that had to be manufactured
v. Adhesives as evidence of connected technologies
vi. The decline of stone tools
vii. Chemical tests that replace excavation

5. Paragraph E ______

i. The limits of what one material can prove
ii. Why adhesive evidence survives when handles do not
iii. How production method affects interpretation
iv. A substance that had to be manufactured
v. Adhesives as evidence of connected technologies
vi. The decline of stone tools
vii. Chemical tests that replace excavation

True/False/Not Given

Questions 6-10

Do the following statements agree with the information given in Reading Passage 1? Write TRUE, FALSE or NOT GIVEN.

6. Birch tar could be collected naturally from trees without heating bark.

7. All experimental birch tar methods require an underground pit.

8. Chemical traces can sometimes help researchers distinguish between production settings.

9. Neanderthals used birch tar mainly for decorating symbolic objects.

10. The author suggests that adhesive finds widen the study of technology beyond stone edges.

Sentence Completion

Questions 11-13

Complete the sentences below. Choose ONE WORD ONLY from the passage for each answer.

11. Birch bark must be heated with limited ________ to create useful tar.

12. In more controlled production, bark may be heated under sediment or in a covered ________.

13. A small tar fragment may imply choices about tool design and ________.

A. Seagrasses are flowering plants that live in shallow coastal waters, where enough light reaches the seabed for photosynthesis. Although they are often mistaken for seaweed, they have roots, leaves, veins, and in some species, flowers and seeds. Their meadows may look plain from the surface, especially when compared with coral reefs, but they perform several ecological functions at once. They provide shelter for juvenile fish and invertebrates, slow water movement, trap suspended particles, and help stabilize loose sediment. These services are often noticed only after they weaken. A bay that once supported clear water and small fish may appear ordinary until repeated disturbance turns the seabed into a cloudier, less stable environment. This delayed visibility partly explains why seagrass protection can be politically difficult. Decline may begin below the surface long before the wider public notices a change from the shore.
B. One reason seagrass has become more prominent in environmental policy is its role in blue carbon. Coastal blue carbon refers to carbon captured and stored by marine and coastal ecosystems, including seagrass beds, mangroves, and salt marshes. In seagrass meadows, some carbon is held in living tissue, but a large part may accumulate in the sediment below the plants. This sediment can remain relatively low in oxygen, which slows decomposition and allows organic material to persist for long periods. The result is a form of storage that is easy to overlook because it is buried rather than visible in trunks or branches. For policy makers, this means a damaged meadow may represent both habitat loss and the disturbance of a long-term carbon store.
C. The carbon value of seagrass, however, is not uniform. A dense meadow in a sheltered bay may trap fine particles and retain organic matter more effectively than a sparse meadow exposed to strong currents. Sediment type, water depth, plant species, and disturbance history all influence how much carbon is stored. This variability creates a problem for managers: a meadow may be ecologically important even if it does not store exceptional amounts of carbon, while a high-carbon meadow may be vulnerable if boat anchoring, dredging, or poor water quality damages the plants. A purely carbon-based ranking can therefore mislead conservation decisions. It may favour sites with impressive storage figures while neglecting meadows that support fisheries, protect shorelines, or improve water clarity. Conversely, a meadow with moderate carbon storage may deserve urgent protection if it connects habitats or prevents sediment from entering a harbour. Managers therefore need several indicators rather than a single headline number when setting local priorities.
D. Seagrass decline is usually connected to pressures from land and sea at the same time. Nutrient runoff can encourage algal growth that blocks sunlight. Sediment from construction or river disturbance can reduce water clarity. Physical damage from propellers and anchors may cut channels through the meadow, and heat stress can weaken plants in shallow water. Because seagrasses need light, even a modest increase in turbidity can reduce growth if it persists through a season. The pressures can also reinforce one another. Once plants thin out, the seabed may become less stable, making it easier for waves and currents to lift sediment back into the water column and reduce light further.
E. Restoration projects show both promise and limitation. In some places, seeds or shoots can be planted successfully once water quality has improved and physical disturbance is controlled. Yet planting alone rarely solves the problem if the original cause of decline remains. A site with continuing sediment pollution may lose new plants before they establish roots. For this reason, many specialists argue that protection of existing meadows is often more efficient than trying to recreate them after collapse. Restoration also demands monitoring over several years, because early growth does not guarantee a self-sustaining meadow. Success depends on whether plants spread, trap sediment, and reproduce under ordinary seasonal conditions.
F. The difficulty is that seagrass benefits are spread across many public interests. Fish nurseries support fisheries, clearer water assists tourism, carbon storage matters to climate policy, and sediment stabilization can reduce coastal erosion. No single agency may be responsible for all these outcomes. Effective governance therefore requires treating seagrass not as an isolated habitat but as infrastructure that quietly supports coastal economies and ecosystems. Its value is hidden only because much of its work occurs below the waterline. When agencies divide budgets by sector, a meadow can fall between categories. A coastal plan that recognizes these linked benefits is more likely to protect the habitat before decline becomes expensive or irreversible. This approach also changes how success is measured. Instead of counting only planted area, managers can monitor water clarity, fish recruitment, sediment stability, and carbon retention together, giving a fuller picture of whether the meadow is functioning.

Passage 2

Seagrass Meadows and the Problem of Hidden Value

An academic IELTS passage on seagrass meadows and the problem of hidden value, opening with seagrasses are flowering plants that live in shallow coastal waters, where enough light reaches the seabed for photosynthesis.

A.A. Seagrasses are flowering plants that live in shallow coastal waters, where enough light reaches the seabed for photosynthesis. Although they are often mistaken for seaweed, they have roots, leaves, veins, and in some species, flowers and seeds. Their meadows may look plain from the surface, especially when compared with coral reefs, but they perform several ecological functions at once. They provide shelter for juvenile fish and invertebrates, slow water movement, trap suspended particles, and help stabilize loose sediment. These services are often noticed only after they weaken. A bay that once supported clear water and small fish may appear ordinary until repeated disturbance turns the seabed into a cloudier, less stable environment. This delayed visibility partly explains why seagrass protection can be politically difficult. Decline may begin below the surface long before the wider public notices a change from the shore.

B.B. One reason seagrass has become more prominent in environmental policy is its role in blue carbon. Coastal blue carbon refers to carbon captured and stored by marine and coastal ecosystems, including seagrass beds, mangroves, and salt marshes. In seagrass meadows, some carbon is held in living tissue, but a large part may accumulate in the sediment below the plants. This sediment can remain relatively low in oxygen, which slows decomposition and allows organic material to persist for long periods. The result is a form of storage that is easy to overlook because it is buried rather than visible in trunks or branches. For policy makers, this means a damaged meadow may represent both habitat loss and the disturbance of a long-term carbon store.

C.C. The carbon value of seagrass, however, is not uniform. A dense meadow in a sheltered bay may trap fine particles and retain organic matter more effectively than a sparse meadow exposed to strong currents. Sediment type, water depth, plant species, and disturbance history all influence how much carbon is stored. This variability creates a problem for managers: a meadow may be ecologically important even if it does not store exceptional amounts of carbon, while a high-carbon meadow may be vulnerable if boat anchoring, dredging, or poor water quality damages the plants. A purely carbon-based ranking can therefore mislead conservation decisions. It may favour sites with impressive storage figures while neglecting meadows that support fisheries, protect shorelines, or improve water clarity. Conversely, a meadow with moderate carbon storage may deserve urgent protection if it connects habitats or prevents sediment from entering a harbour. Managers therefore need several indicators rather than a single headline number when setting local priorities.

D.D. Seagrass decline is usually connected to pressures from land and sea at the same time. Nutrient runoff can encourage algal growth that blocks sunlight. Sediment from construction or river disturbance can reduce water clarity. Physical damage from propellers and anchors may cut channels through the meadow, and heat stress can weaken plants in shallow water. Because seagrasses need light, even a modest increase in turbidity can reduce growth if it persists through a season. The pressures can also reinforce one another. Once plants thin out, the seabed may become less stable, making it easier for waves and currents to lift sediment back into the water column and reduce light further.

E.E. Restoration projects show both promise and limitation. In some places, seeds or shoots can be planted successfully once water quality has improved and physical disturbance is controlled. Yet planting alone rarely solves the problem if the original cause of decline remains. A site with continuing sediment pollution may lose new plants before they establish roots. For this reason, many specialists argue that protection of existing meadows is often more efficient than trying to recreate them after collapse. Restoration also demands monitoring over several years, because early growth does not guarantee a self-sustaining meadow. Success depends on whether plants spread, trap sediment, and reproduce under ordinary seasonal conditions.

F.F. The difficulty is that seagrass benefits are spread across many public interests. Fish nurseries support fisheries, clearer water assists tourism, carbon storage matters to climate policy, and sediment stabilization can reduce coastal erosion. No single agency may be responsible for all these outcomes. Effective governance therefore requires treating seagrass not as an isolated habitat but as infrastructure that quietly supports coastal economies and ecosystems. Its value is hidden only because much of its work occurs below the waterline. When agencies divide budgets by sector, a meadow can fall between categories. A coastal plan that recognizes these linked benefits is more likely to protect the habitat before decline becomes expensive or irreversible. This approach also changes how success is measured. Instead of counting only planted area, managers can monitor water clarity, fish recruitment, sediment stability, and carbon retention together, giving a fuller picture of whether the meadow is functioning.

Matching Information

Questions 14-18

Which paragraph contains the following information? Write the correct letter, A-F.

14. a reason why conservation agencies may undervalue a habitat ______

15. examples of damage caused by human movement on water ______

16. a contrast between living carbon and sediment carbon ______

17. conditions that make restoration unlikely to succeed ______

18. factors that explain why carbon storage differs between sites ______

Summary Completion

Questions 19-23

Complete the summary below. Choose ONE WORD ONLY from the passage for each answer.

19. Seagrasses are not seaweed, but flowering plants with roots, leaves, veins, and sometimes flowers and ________.

20. Their meadows slow water movement and help stabilize loose ________.

21. In seagrass beds, much carbon may be stored below the plants where low oxygen slows ________.

22. Nutrient runoff can promote algal growth that blocks ________.

23. Many specialists see protecting existing meadows as more efficient than trying to restore them after ________.

Multiple Choice

Questions 24-26

Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or D.

24. What is the main purpose of paragraph C? A. To argue that all seagrass meadows store similar carbon amounts. B. To explain why measuring seagrass value is complicated. C. To show that exposed meadows are always more important than sheltered ones. D. To reject carbon storage as a reason for seagrass protection.

25. According to the passage, why may planting new seagrass fail? A. Seeds cannot grow in shallow water. B. Restoration is illegal in most coastal areas. C. The original environmental pressure may continue. D. Fish nurseries prevent new roots forming.

26. The writer's conclusion is that seagrass should be regarded as A. a decorative coastal plant, B. a single-purpose carbon project, C. infrastructure supporting several public benefits, D. a habitat that matters only to fisheries.

Passage 3

Can Reflective Cities Solve Urban Heat?

An academic IELTS passage on can reflective cities solve urban heat?, opening with as heat waves become a more serious urban risk, city governments are being urged to make streets, roofs, and walls more reflective.

A.A. As heat waves become a more serious urban risk, city governments are being urged to make streets, roofs, and walls more reflective. The basic physical logic is clear: a surface with higher albedo reflects a larger proportion of incoming solar radiation and absorbs less heat. A pale roof can therefore remain cooler than a dark roof under the same sun, and less heat is transferred into the building below. At city scale, this appears to offer an unusually direct intervention. Unlike major transport redesign or deep building retrofits, reflective coatings can sometimes be applied to existing surfaces. The promise is especially attractive to cities that need visible action within one budget cycle, because a roof can be measured, specified, and treated more easily than an entire neighbourhood can be rebuilt.

B.B. The appeal of this approach has encouraged a language of quick fixes. Policy documents may present cool roofs, reflective pavements, and solar-reflective walls as practical measures with measurable benefits for energy demand and outdoor temperatures. These claims are not empty. In hot climates, reducing roof heat gain can lower cooling loads, and cooler surfaces can make some neighbourhoods less oppressive during summer afternoons. The problem begins when reflectivity is treated as a universal substitute for urban climate design rather than as one tool within it. A coating can change the energy balance of a surface, but it cannot by itself create shade, improve ventilation, correct poor housing quality, or decide which residents receive protection first.

C.C. A city is not a flat laboratory plate. Urban canyons, building heights, street width, wind patterns, tree cover, and human activity all shape the way heat is stored and released. Increasing reflectivity on a roof may benefit the building below without greatly improving pedestrian comfort at street level. Reflective pavements can reduce surface temperature, but they may also increase the amount of radiation felt by walkers if shade is absent. A material can therefore look successful under one measurement and less successful under another. This is why field studies often distinguish between surface temperature, air temperature, and human thermal comfort. The same intervention can score differently depending on which outcome is treated as the goal. A surface that is cooler to the touch may not produce a proportional fall in air temperature, and a lower air temperature may still leave people exposed if radiant heat and humidity remain high.

D.D. This measurement problem matters because urban heat is both physical and social. Surface temperature, air temperature, indoor comfort, electricity demand, and heat-related health risk do not always move together. A policy that lowers average surface temperature may still fail residents who live in poorly insulated upper-floor flats, work outdoors, or cannot afford air conditioning. The question is not simply whether a reflective material cools a surface, but who experiences the benefit and under what conditions. If public investment is justified by health protection, then the location of vulnerable people should matter as much as the location of roofs. Otherwise, a city may report a technical improvement while leaving the most exposed residents with little practical relief.

E.E. Vegetation complicates the comparison further. Trees and green roofs reduce heat through shade and evapotranspiration, while also supporting stormwater management and habitat. They are slower to establish than a coating and may require soil, water, maintenance, and space that dense districts lack. Yet their cooling can operate at the height where people move and wait. A reflective roof and a street tree are therefore not interchangeable technologies; they act through different mechanisms and serve different urban layers. The fairest comparison is not which one is superior in the abstract, but which combination matches the shape, exposure, budget, and maintenance capacity of a particular district.

F.F. The strongest case for reflective surfaces is not that they solve urban heat alone, but that they can be targeted with precision. Large, unshaded roofs on schools, warehouses, and public buildings may offer high returns because the roof area is large, ownership is clear, and indoor comfort is directly affected. In such cases, albedo policy can be paired with insulation, ventilation, and emergency cooling plans. The weakness of broad mandates is that they may spend political attention on visible surfaces while ignoring vulnerable interiors and treeless streets. Targeting also allows monitoring to be more honest. Instead of claiming that a city has become cooler overall, officials can ask whether selected buildings used less energy, whether indoor temperatures fell, and whether students, patients, or tenants actually benefited.

G.G. A more defensible urban heat strategy begins with diagnosis. It asks where heat is stored, which groups are exposed, which surfaces are controllable, and which interventions operate at the right scale. Reflective materials have a place in that strategy, especially when rapid action is needed before slower ecological measures mature. But the idea of the reflective city becomes misleading when it suggests that bouncing sunlight away is equivalent to building thermal resilience. Resilience requires a sequence of choices, not a single property of paint. Those choices include shade, housing quality, emergency response, public space design, and maintenance over time. Reflection is useful when it is placed inside that sequence; it is inadequate when it is mistaken for the sequence itself. The most persuasive policies therefore avoid both rejection and enthusiasm. They treat albedo as a measurable physical lever, then connect that lever to local evidence about buildings, streets, residents, and risk.

Yes/No/Not Given

Questions 27-31

Do the following statements agree with the claims of the writer in Reading Passage 3? Write YES, NO or NOT GIVEN.

27. The writer believes reflective surfaces can be installed more easily than some deeper urban redesigns.

28. The writer claims reflective pavements always improve pedestrian comfort.

29. The writer thinks social vulnerability should be considered when judging heat policies.

30. The writer states that green roofs are cheaper to maintain than reflective roofs.

31. The writer argues that reflective materials should be abandoned in favour of vegetation.

Matching Sentence Endings

Questions 32-36

Complete each sentence with the correct ending, A-G, below.

32. Increasing albedo on a roof ______

A. may cool a building without solving street-level exposure.
B. are always the fastest way to reduce mortality.
c. should be chosen after diagnosing local heat conditions.
d. may overlook vulnerable interiors and treeless streets.
E. cool partly through shade and evapotranspiration.
F. is enough to create thermal resilience.
G. can hide unequal distribution of benefits.

33. A policy based only on average surface temperature ______

A. may cool a building without solving street-level exposure.
B. are always the fastest way to reduce mortality.
c. should be chosen after diagnosing local heat conditions.
d. may overlook vulnerable interiors and treeless streets.
E. cool partly through shade and evapotranspiration.
F. is enough to create thermal resilience.
G. can hide unequal distribution of benefits.

34. Trees and green roofs ______

A. may cool a building without solving street-level exposure.
B. are always the fastest way to reduce mortality.
c. should be chosen after diagnosing local heat conditions.
d. may overlook vulnerable interiors and treeless streets.
E. cool partly through shade and evapotranspiration.
F. is enough to create thermal resilience.
G. can hide unequal distribution of benefits.

35. Broad reflective-surface mandates ______

A. may cool a building without solving street-level exposure.
B. are always the fastest way to reduce mortality.
c. should be chosen after diagnosing local heat conditions.
d. may overlook vulnerable interiors and treeless streets.
E. cool partly through shade and evapotranspiration.
F. is enough to create thermal resilience.
G. can hide unequal distribution of benefits.

36. A defensible urban heat strategy ______

A. may cool a building without solving street-level exposure.
B. are always the fastest way to reduce mortality.
c. should be chosen after diagnosing local heat conditions.
d. may overlook vulnerable interiors and treeless streets.
E. cool partly through shade and evapotranspiration.
F. is enough to create thermal resilience.
G. can hide unequal distribution of benefits.

Multiple Choice

Questions 37-40

Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or D.

37. What criticism does the writer make of 'quick fix' language? A. It denies that reflective surfaces have any measurable effect. B. It treats one useful measure as if it could replace wider climate design. C. It relies only on transport redesign. D. It makes vegetation appear faster than coatings.

38. Why does the writer describe a city as not being a 'flat laboratory plate'? A. Urban form changes how heat is stored and experienced. B. Laboratory studies cannot measure albedo. C. Cities contain no comparable surfaces. D. Reflective roofs cannot be installed in dense districts.

39. Which projects does the writer present as strong candidates for reflective-surface policy? A. Small shaded roofs in private gardens. B. Large unshaded roofs on schools, warehouses and public buildings. C. Narrow pavements under mature trees. D. Coastal streets with constant sea wind.

40. What is the writer's overall position? A. Reflective surfaces are useless in urban heat policy. B. Reflective surfaces are valuable only when integrated with diagnosis and other measures. C. Reflective paint should replace urban trees. D. Urban heat can be solved by changing surface colour alone.