Nearly two weeks after Taal volcano’s first eruption in over 40 years, the Philippines Institute of Volcanology and Seismology has lowered its threat assessment a notch, and local residents have begun to stream back to their homes in jeepneys, pickups and on the backs of motorcycles. When Taal roared to life on January 12th, the plume of steam and ash it sent 32,000 feet into the air was so vast it generated its own weather system, with thunder and lightning. As the falling cinders turned day to night, tens of thousands of evacuees fled for hastily created evacuation centres a safe distance from Taal’s spite.

Usually, Taal is a draw. The volcano has made its own island in the middle of Taal lake, which occupies the caldera of a much bigger volcano which exploded eons ago. The surrounding slopes are forested. Papayas and vegetables thrive on village plots by the shore. The lake itself provides livelihoods to those farming tilapia fish. More jobs come from catering to visitors from Manila who flock to the lake, or to the resort town of Tagatay on an overlooking ridge, for the fresh air, sweeping views and grilled fish.

Yet these times are hardly usual. The eruption seems to have caused a lot of the lake’s water to evaporate. Taal’s ash has turned a vast area a monotone grey. Rain following the eruption has hardened the ash to concrete. The tin roofs of villagers’ houses have buckled and trees have lost their main branches.

The repair teams from the electricity board and villagers chipping the ash off roofs have returned to rebuild their home—life has a yen for normality, too. Not the volcano, however. The earthquakes following the eruption have fallen in number and severity, and an alarming build-up of magma appears to have diminished. But Paolo Reniva, a geologist, expects Taal’s current cycle of activity to last months or years.

This is not what those trying to resume their lives want to hear. The current threat assessment of 3 on a scale of 0 to 5 risks being viewed as normal by locals. And just as President Donald Trump downplays climate change, so populist Filipino politicians downplay nature’s forces. The vice-mayor of Tali say, Charlie Natanauan, a local businessman who is campaigning to unseat the mayor, goes further by urging locals not to believe the "idiot" scientists. Taal is not going to explode again, he insists, because he knows its history; if he’s wrong, he adds, then throw him into the crater. What’s more, the scientists’ warnings about poisoned tilapia are off-the-mark too, and he will eat as many fish as needed to prove it. It goes down a storm with locals.

Sitting on a veranda by the lake, next to a gold-painted statue of himself toting a rifle and pistol, Mr Natanauan lays out his future plans. Behind him, dozens of dead tilapia float upside down, slapping against his jetty. Just beyond, the volcano gently steams.

The eruption of Taal volcano described in the first paragraph indicates______.

Nearly two weeks after Taal volcano’s first eruption in over 40 years, the Philippines Institute of Volcanology and Seismology has lowered its threat assessment a notch, and local residents have begun to stream back to their homes in jeepneys, pickups and on the backs of motorcycles. When Taal roared to life on January 12th, the plume of steam and ash it sent 32,000 feet into the air was so vast it generated its own weather system, with thunder and lightning. As the falling cinders turned day to night, tens of thousands of evacuees fled for hastily created evacuation centres a safe distance from Taal’s spite.

Usually, Taal is a draw. The volcano has made its own island in the middle of Taal lake, which occupies the caldera of a much bigger volcano which exploded eons ago. The surrounding slopes are forested. Papayas and vegetables thrive on village plots by the shore. The lake itself provides livelihoods to those farming tilapia fish. More jobs come from catering to visitors from Manila who flock to the lake, or to the resort town of Tagatay on an overlooking ridge, for the fresh air, sweeping views and grilled fish.

Yet these times are hardly usual. The eruption seems to have caused a lot of the lake’s water to evaporate. Taal’s ash has turned a vast area a monotone grey. Rain following the eruption has hardened the ash to concrete. The tin roofs of villagers’ houses have buckled and trees have lost their main branches.

The repair teams from the electricity board and villagers chipping the ash off roofs have returned to rebuild their home—life has a yen for normality, too. Not the volcano, however. The earthquakes following the eruption have fallen in number and severity, and an alarming build-up of magma appears to have diminished. But Paolo Reniva, a geologist, expects Taal’s current cycle of activity to last months or years.

This is not what those trying to resume their lives want to hear. The current threat assessment of 3 on a scale of 0 to 5 risks being viewed as normal by locals. And just as President Donald Trump downplays climate change, so populist Filipino politicians downplay nature’s forces. The vice-mayor of Tali say, Charlie Natanauan, a local businessman who is campaigning to unseat the mayor, goes further by urging locals not to believe the "idiot" scientists. Taal is not going to explode again, he insists, because he knows its history; if he’s wrong, he adds, then throw him into the crater. What’s more, the scientists’ warnings about poisoned tilapia are off-the-mark too, and he will eat as many fish as needed to prove it. It goes down a storm with locals.

Sitting on a veranda by the lake, next to a gold-painted statue of himself toting a rifle and pistol, Mr Natanauan lays out his future plans. Behind him, dozens of dead tilapia float upside down, slapping against his jetty. Just beyond, the volcano gently steams.

According to Paragraph 2, Taal provided local residents with______.

Nearly two weeks after Taal volcano’s first eruption in over 40 years, the Philippines Institute of Volcanology and Seismology has lowered its threat assessment a notch, and local residents have begun to stream back to their homes in jeepneys, pickups and on the backs of motorcycles. When Taal roared to life on January 12th, the plume of steam and ash it sent 32,000 feet into the air was so vast it generated its own weather system, with thunder and lightning. As the falling cinders turned day to night, tens of thousands of evacuees fled for hastily created evacuation centres a safe distance from Taal’s spite.

Usually, Taal is a draw. The volcano has made its own island in the middle of Taal lake, which occupies the caldera of a much bigger volcano which exploded eons ago. The surrounding slopes are forested. Papayas and vegetables thrive on village plots by the shore. The lake itself provides livelihoods to those farming tilapia fish. More jobs come from catering to visitors from Manila who flock to the lake, or to the resort town of Tagatay on an overlooking ridge, for the fresh air, sweeping views and grilled fish.

Yet these times are hardly usual. The eruption seems to have caused a lot of the lake’s water to evaporate. Taal’s ash has turned a vast area a monotone grey. Rain following the eruption has hardened the ash to concrete. The tin roofs of villagers’ houses have buckled and trees have lost their main branches.

The repair teams from the electricity board and villagers chipping the ash off roofs have returned to rebuild their home—life has a yen for normality, too. Not the volcano, however. The earthquakes following the eruption have fallen in number and severity, and an alarming build-up of magma appears to have diminished. But Paolo Reniva, a geologist, expects Taal’s current cycle of activity to last months or years.

This is not what those trying to resume their lives want to hear. The current threat assessment of 3 on a scale of 0 to 5 risks being viewed as normal by locals. And just as President Donald Trump downplays climate change, so populist Filipino politicians downplay nature’s forces. The vice-mayor of Tali say, Charlie Natanauan, a local businessman who is campaigning to unseat the mayor, goes further by urging locals not to believe the "idiot" scientists. Taal is not going to explode again, he insists, because he knows its history; if he’s wrong, he adds, then throw him into the crater. What’s more, the scientists’ warnings about poisoned tilapia are off-the-mark too, and he will eat as many fish as needed to prove it. It goes down a storm with locals.

Sitting on a veranda by the lake, next to a gold-painted statue of himself toting a rifle and pistol, Mr Natanauan lays out his future plans. Behind him, dozens of dead tilapia float upside down, slapping against his jetty. Just beyond, the volcano gently steams.

It can be inferred from Paolo Reniva’s expectation that______.

Nearly two weeks after Taal volcano’s first eruption in over 40 years, the Philippines Institute of Volcanology and Seismology has lowered its threat assessment a notch, and local residents have begun to stream back to their homes in jeepneys, pickups and on the backs of motorcycles. When Taal roared to life on January 12th, the plume of steam and ash it sent 32,000 feet into the air was so vast it generated its own weather system, with thunder and lightning. As the falling cinders turned day to night, tens of thousands of evacuees fled for hastily created evacuation centres a safe distance from Taal’s spite.

Usually, Taal is a draw. The volcano has made its own island in the middle of Taal lake, which occupies the caldera of a much bigger volcano which exploded eons ago. The surrounding slopes are forested. Papayas and vegetables thrive on village plots by the shore. The lake itself provides livelihoods to those farming tilapia fish. More jobs come from catering to visitors from Manila who flock to the lake, or to the resort town of Tagatay on an overlooking ridge, for the fresh air, sweeping views and grilled fish.

Yet these times are hardly usual. The eruption seems to have caused a lot of the lake’s water to evaporate. Taal’s ash has turned a vast area a monotone grey. Rain following the eruption has hardened the ash to concrete. The tin roofs of villagers’ houses have buckled and trees have lost their main branches.

The repair teams from the electricity board and villagers chipping the ash off roofs have returned to rebuild their home—life has a yen for normality, too. Not the volcano, however. The earthquakes following the eruption have fallen in number and severity, and an alarming build-up of magma appears to have diminished. But Paolo Reniva, a geologist, expects Taal’s current cycle of activity to last months or years.

This is not what those trying to resume their lives want to hear. The current threat assessment of 3 on a scale of 0 to 5 risks being viewed as normal by locals. And just as President Donald Trump downplays climate change, so populist Filipino politicians downplay nature’s forces. The vice-mayor of Tali say, Charlie Natanauan, a local businessman who is campaigning to unseat the mayor, goes further by urging locals not to believe the "idiot" scientists. Taal is not going to explode again, he insists, because he knows its history; if he’s wrong, he adds, then throw him into the crater. What’s more, the scientists’ warnings about poisoned tilapia are off-the-mark too, and he will eat as many fish as needed to prove it. It goes down a storm with locals.

Sitting on a veranda by the lake, next to a gold-painted statue of himself toting a rifle and pistol, Mr Natanauan lays out his future plans. Behind him, dozens of dead tilapia float upside down, slapping against his jetty. Just beyond, the volcano gently steams.

Charlie Natanauan’s attitude toward the threat of Taal may be______.

Nearly two weeks after Taal volcano’s first eruption in over 40 years, the Philippines Institute of Volcanology and Seismology has lowered its threat assessment a notch, and local residents have begun to stream back to their homes in jeepneys, pickups and on the backs of motorcycles. When Taal roared to life on January 12th, the plume of steam and ash it sent 32,000 feet into the air was so vast it generated its own weather system, with thunder and lightning. As the falling cinders turned day to night, tens of thousands of evacuees fled for hastily created evacuation centres a safe distance from Taal’s spite.

Usually, Taal is a draw. The volcano has made its own island in the middle of Taal lake, which occupies the caldera of a much bigger volcano which exploded eons ago. The surrounding slopes are forested. Papayas and vegetables thrive on village plots by the shore. The lake itself provides livelihoods to those farming tilapia fish. More jobs come from catering to visitors from Manila who flock to the lake, or to the resort town of Tagatay on an overlooking ridge, for the fresh air, sweeping views and grilled fish.

Yet these times are hardly usual. The eruption seems to have caused a lot of the lake’s water to evaporate. Taal’s ash has turned a vast area a monotone grey. Rain following the eruption has hardened the ash to concrete. The tin roofs of villagers’ houses have buckled and trees have lost their main branches.

The repair teams from the electricity board and villagers chipping the ash off roofs have returned to rebuild their home—life has a yen for normality, too. Not the volcano, however. The earthquakes following the eruption have fallen in number and severity, and an alarming build-up of magma appears to have diminished. But Paolo Reniva, a geologist, expects Taal’s current cycle of activity to last months or years.

This is not what those trying to resume their lives want to hear. The current threat assessment of 3 on a scale of 0 to 5 risks being viewed as normal by locals. And just as President Donald Trump downplays climate change, so populist Filipino politicians downplay nature’s forces. The vice-mayor of Tali say, Charlie Natanauan, a local businessman who is campaigning to unseat the mayor, goes further by urging locals not to believe the "idiot" scientists. Taal is not going to explode again, he insists, because he knows its history; if he’s wrong, he adds, then throw him into the crater. What’s more, the scientists’ warnings about poisoned tilapia are off-the-mark too, and he will eat as many fish as needed to prove it. It goes down a storm with locals.

Sitting on a veranda by the lake, next to a gold-painted statue of himself toting a rifle and pistol, Mr Natanauan lays out his future plans. Behind him, dozens of dead tilapia float upside down, slapping against his jetty. Just beyond, the volcano gently steams.

It can be inferred from Paragraph 6 that______.

It must feel good to be back on top—and this time, almost liked. Twenty years ago Microsoft was considered an evil empire, scheming for domination and involved in a fierce antitrust battle with America’s Justice Department. Five years ago, having dozed through the rise of social media and smartphones, it was derided as a doddery has-been. Now, after several quarters—this month it reported revenue of $33.7 bn, up by 12% year on year—Microsoft is once again the world’s most valuable listed company, worth over $1trn. How did Satya Nadella, the boss since 2014, pull off this comeback? And what can the other tech giants learn from Microsoft’s experience?

First, be prepared to look beyond the golden goose. Microsoft missed social networks and smartphones because of its obsession with Windows, the operating system that was its main money-spinner. One of Mr. Nadella’s most important acts after taking the helm was to deprioritize Windows. More important, he also bet big on the "cloud"—just as firms started getting comfortable with renting computing power. In the past quarter revenues at Azure, Microsoft’s cloud division, grew by 68% year on year, and it now has nearly half the market share of Amazon Web Services, the industry leader.

Second, work with regulators rather than try to outwit or overwhelm them. From the start Microsoft designed Azure in such a way that it could accommodate local data-protection laws. Its president and chief legal officer, Brad Smith, has been the source of many policy proposals, such as a "Digital Geneva Convention" to protect people from cyber-attacks by nation-states.He is also behind Microsoft’s comparatively cautious use of artificial intelligence, and calls for oversight of facial recognition. The firm has been relatively untouched by the current backlash against tech firms, and is less vulnerable to new regulation.

True, missing the boat on social media means thorny matters such as content moderation pose greater difficulties for Facebook and Google. Still, others would do well to follow Microsoft’s lead. Apple has championed its customers’ privacy, but its treatment of competitors’ services in its app store may soon land it in antitrust trouble. Facebook and Google have started to recognize that with great power comes great responsibility, but each has yet to find its equivalent of Azure, a new business model beyond its original golden goose. Amazon, in its ambition and culture, most resembles the old Microsoft.

Even a reformed monopolist demands scrutiny. It should not be forgotten that Microsoft got where it is today in part through rapacity. Critics argue that in its battle with Slack, a corporate-messaging service which competes with a Microsoft product, it is up to some of its old tricks. A growing number of women at the firm are complaining about sexual harassment and discrimination. The new Microsoft is far from perfect. But it has learned some lessons that other tech giants should heed.

Why was Microsoft derided as a doddery has-been according to Paragraph 1?

It must feel good to be back on top—and this time, almost liked. Twenty years ago Microsoft was considered an evil empire, scheming for domination and involved in a fierce antitrust battle with America’s Justice Department. Five years ago, having dozed through the rise of social media and smartphones, it was derided as a doddery has-been. Now, after several quarters—this month it reported revenue of $33.7 bn, up by 12% year on year—Microsoft is once again the world’s most valuable listed company, worth over $1trn. How did Satya Nadella, the boss since 2014, pull off this comeback? And what can the other tech giants learn from Microsoft’s experience?

First, be prepared to look beyond the golden goose. Microsoft missed social networks and smartphones because of its obsession with Windows, the operating system that was its main money-spinner. One of Mr. Nadella’s most important acts after taking the helm was to deprioritize Windows. More important, he also bet big on the "cloud"—just as firms started getting comfortable with renting computing power. In the past quarter revenues at Azure, Microsoft’s cloud division, grew by 68% year on year, and it now has nearly half the market share of Amazon Web Services, the industry leader.

Second, work with regulators rather than try to outwit or overwhelm them. From the start Microsoft designed Azure in such a way that it could accommodate local data-protection laws. Its president and chief legal officer, Brad Smith, has been the source of many policy proposals, such as a "Digital Geneva Convention" to protect people from cyber-attacks by nation-states.He is also behind Microsoft’s comparatively cautious use of artificial intelligence, and calls for oversight of facial recognition. The firm has been relatively untouched by the current backlash against tech firms, and is less vulnerable to new regulation.

True, missing the boat on social media means thorny matters such as content moderation pose greater difficulties for Facebook and Google. Still, others would do well to follow Microsoft’s lead. Apple has championed its customers’ privacy, but its treatment of competitors’ services in its app store may soon land it in antitrust trouble. Facebook and Google have started to recognize that with great power comes great responsibility, but each has yet to find its equivalent of Azure, a new business model beyond its original golden goose. Amazon, in its ambition and culture, most resembles the old Microsoft.

Even a reformed monopolist demands scrutiny. It should not be forgotten that Microsoft got where it is today in part through rapacity. Critics argue that in its battle with Slack, a corporate-messaging service which competes with a Microsoft product, it is up to some of its old tricks. A growing number of women at the firm are complaining about sexual harassment and discrimination. The new Microsoft is far from perfect. But it has learned some lessons that other tech giants should heed.

The top-priority initiative taken by Mr. Nadella after he took office was______.

It must feel good to be back on top—and this time, almost liked. Twenty years ago Microsoft was considered an evil empire, scheming for domination and involved in a fierce antitrust battle with America’s Justice Department. Five years ago, having dozed through the rise of social media and smartphones, it was derided as a doddery has-been. Now, after several quarters—this month it reported revenue of $33.7 bn, up by 12% year on year—Microsoft is once again the world’s most valuable listed company, worth over $1trn. How did Satya Nadella, the boss since 2014, pull off this comeback? And what can the other tech giants learn from Microsoft’s experience?

First, be prepared to look beyond the golden goose. Microsoft missed social networks and smartphones because of its obsession with Windows, the operating system that was its main money-spinner. One of Mr. Nadella’s most important acts after taking the helm was to deprioritize Windows. More important, he also bet big on the "cloud"—just as firms started getting comfortable with renting computing power. In the past quarter revenues at Azure, Microsoft’s cloud division, grew by 68% year on year, and it now has nearly half the market share of Amazon Web Services, the industry leader.

Second, work with regulators rather than try to outwit or overwhelm them. From the start Microsoft designed Azure in such a way that it could accommodate local data-protection laws. Its president and chief legal officer, Brad Smith, has been the source of many policy proposals, such as a "Digital Geneva Convention" to protect people from cyber-attacks by nation-states.He is also behind Microsoft’s comparatively cautious use of artificial intelligence, and calls for oversight of facial recognition. The firm has been relatively untouched by the current backlash against tech firms, and is less vulnerable to new regulation.

True, missing the boat on social media means thorny matters such as content moderation pose greater difficulties for Facebook and Google. Still, others would do well to follow Microsoft’s lead. Apple has championed its customers’ privacy, but its treatment of competitors’ services in its app store may soon land it in antitrust trouble. Facebook and Google have started to recognize that with great power comes great responsibility, but each has yet to find its equivalent of Azure, a new business model beyond its original golden goose. Amazon, in its ambition and culture, most resembles the old Microsoft.

Even a reformed monopolist demands scrutiny. It should not be forgotten that Microsoft got where it is today in part through rapacity. Critics argue that in its battle with Slack, a corporate-messaging service which competes with a Microsoft product, it is up to some of its old tricks. A growing number of women at the firm are complaining about sexual harassment and discrimination. The new Microsoft is far from perfect. But it has learned some lessons that other tech giants should heed.

According to Paragraph 3, the purpose of "Digital Geneva Convention" put forward by Brad Smith was to______.

It must feel good to be back on top—and this time, almost liked. Twenty years ago Microsoft was considered an evil empire, scheming for domination and involved in a fierce antitrust battle with America’s Justice Department. Five years ago, having dozed through the rise of social media and smartphones, it was derided as a doddery has-been. Now, after several quarters—this month it reported revenue of $33.7 bn, up by 12% year on year—Microsoft is once again the world’s most valuable listed company, worth over $1trn. How did Satya Nadella, the boss since 2014, pull off this comeback? And what can the other tech giants learn from Microsoft’s experience?

First, be prepared to look beyond the golden goose. Microsoft missed social networks and smartphones because of its obsession with Windows, the operating system that was its main money-spinner. One of Mr. Nadella’s most important acts after taking the helm was to deprioritize Windows. More important, he also bet big on the "cloud"—just as firms started getting comfortable with renting computing power. In the past quarter revenues at Azure, Microsoft’s cloud division, grew by 68% year on year, and it now has nearly half the market share of Amazon Web Services, the industry leader.

Second, work with regulators rather than try to outwit or overwhelm them. From the start Microsoft designed Azure in such a way that it could accommodate local data-protection laws. Its president and chief legal officer, Brad Smith, has been the source of many policy proposals, such as a "Digital Geneva Convention" to protect people from cyber-attacks by nation-states.He is also behind Microsoft’s comparatively cautious use of artificial intelligence, and calls for oversight of facial recognition. The firm has been relatively untouched by the current backlash against tech firms, and is less vulnerable to new regulation.

True, missing the boat on social media means thorny matters such as content moderation pose greater difficulties for Facebook and Google. Still, others would do well to follow Microsoft’s lead. Apple has championed its customers’ privacy, but its treatment of competitors’ services in its app store may soon land it in antitrust trouble. Facebook and Google have started to recognize that with great power comes great responsibility, but each has yet to find its equivalent of Azure, a new business model beyond its original golden goose. Amazon, in its ambition and culture, most resembles the old Microsoft.

Even a reformed monopolist demands scrutiny. It should not be forgotten that Microsoft got where it is today in part through rapacity. Critics argue that in its battle with Slack, a corporate-messaging service which competes with a Microsoft product, it is up to some of its old tricks. A growing number of women at the firm are complaining about sexual harassment and discrimination. The new Microsoft is far from perfect. But it has learned some lessons that other tech giants should heed.

In the last two paragraphs, the author argues that______.

It must feel good to be back on top—and this time, almost liked. Twenty years ago Microsoft was considered an evil empire, scheming for domination and involved in a fierce antitrust battle with America’s Justice Department. Five years ago, having dozed through the rise of social media and smartphones, it was derided as a doddery has-been. Now, after several quarters—this month it reported revenue of $33.7 bn, up by 12% year on year—Microsoft is once again the world’s most valuable listed company, worth over $1trn. How did Satya Nadella, the boss since 2014, pull off this comeback? And what can the other tech giants learn from Microsoft’s experience?

First, be prepared to look beyond the golden goose. Microsoft missed social networks and smartphones because of its obsession with Windows, the operating system that was its main money-spinner. One of Mr. Nadella’s most important acts after taking the helm was to deprioritize Windows. More important, he also bet big on the "cloud"—just as firms started getting comfortable with renting computing power. In the past quarter revenues at Azure, Microsoft’s cloud division, grew by 68% year on year, and it now has nearly half the market share of Amazon Web Services, the industry leader.

Second, work with regulators rather than try to outwit or overwhelm them. From the start Microsoft designed Azure in such a way that it could accommodate local data-protection laws. Its president and chief legal officer, Brad Smith, has been the source of many policy proposals, such as a "Digital Geneva Convention" to protect people from cyber-attacks by nation-states.He is also behind Microsoft’s comparatively cautious use of artificial intelligence, and calls for oversight of facial recognition. The firm has been relatively untouched by the current backlash against tech firms, and is less vulnerable to new regulation.

True, missing the boat on social media means thorny matters such as content moderation pose greater difficulties for Facebook and Google. Still, others would do well to follow Microsoft’s lead. Apple has championed its customers’ privacy, but its treatment of competitors’ services in its app store may soon land it in antitrust trouble. Facebook and Google have started to recognize that with great power comes great responsibility, but each has yet to find its equivalent of Azure, a new business model beyond its original golden goose. Amazon, in its ambition and culture, most resembles the old Microsoft.

Even a reformed monopolist demands scrutiny. It should not be forgotten that Microsoft got where it is today in part through rapacity. Critics argue that in its battle with Slack, a corporate-messaging service which competes with a Microsoft product, it is up to some of its old tricks. A growing number of women at the firm are complaining about sexual harassment and discrimination. The new Microsoft is far from perfect. But it has learned some lessons that other tech giants should heed.

According to the last paragraph, the author’s attitude toward the rebirth of Microsoft is______.

The UK’s largest airports are set to spend millions of pounds on anti-drone equipment as they seek to protect themselves from attacks such as the one that grounded about 1,000 flights into and out of Gatwick airport during the Christmas period.

It emerged yesterday that the country’s two busiest hubs, Heathrow and Gatwick, had already bought in their own military-grade anti-drone apparatus. The owners of both airports have invested millions in the equipment after about 140,000 passengers were affected by unprecedented disruption to Gatwick. The military had to be called in amid a series of reported drone sightings over the course of three days and it is believed that the Israeli-developed Drone Dome system, which can detect and jam communications between a drone and its operator, was deployed.

While Gatwick would not say what equipment had been installed, a spokeswoman said the airport’s owners had bought a system that provided a similar level of protection and that had been installed about a week ago. A Heathrow spokeswoman also confirmed that reports of investment in military-grade anti-drone equipment there were accurate.

On Wednesday, the Ministry of Defence confirmed it had withdrawn its resources from Gatwick, though a spokesman said the armed forces "stand ever ready to assist should a request for support be received". It is understood that the transport secretary, Chris Grayling, chaired a top-level meeting yesterday in which defence and police chiefs, together with Home Office officials, discussed how to handle the threat of drones in the future. The aviation minister, Liz Sugg, is also due to meet the heads of the UK’s major airports next week to discuss the states of their own defences, and what they plan to put in place in future.

The airports are expected to announce significant investments in further anti-drone systems, though not all will necessarily be in the form and scale of those deployed at the two London airports. A Gatwick spokeswoman said the airport had "invested several million pounds in new equipment which provides a similar level of reassurance as offered by the armed forces". A Heathrow spokeswoman said:"The safety of our passengers and colleagues remains our top priority. Working closely with relevant authorities including the Met police, we are constantly looking at the best technologies that help remove the threat of drones."

Last week officers received 115 reports of drone sightings in the area, including 93 that had been confirmed as coming from credible people including a airport staff. Some reports of drones in the area may have involved the police’s own craft. It was absolutely certain that a drone had been flying near the airport’s runways during the three-day disruption. Police are still searching for those responsible.

According to the first paragraph, the UK’s largest airports______.

The UK’s largest airports are set to spend millions of pounds on anti-drone equipment as they seek to protect themselves from attacks such as the one that grounded about 1,000 flights into and out of Gatwick airport during the Christmas period.

It emerged yesterday that the country’s two busiest hubs, Heathrow and Gatwick, had already bought in their own military-grade anti-drone apparatus. The owners of both airports have invested millions in the equipment after about 140,000 passengers were affected by unprecedented disruption to Gatwick. The military had to be called in amid a series of reported drone sightings over the course of three days and it is believed that the Israeli-developed Drone Dome system, which can detect and jam communications between a drone and its operator, was deployed.

While Gatwick would not say what equipment had been installed, a spokeswoman said the airport’s owners had bought a system that provided a similar level of protection and that had been installed about a week ago. A Heathrow spokeswoman also confirmed that reports of investment in military-grade anti-drone equipment there were accurate.

On Wednesday, the Ministry of Defence confirmed it had withdrawn its resources from Gatwick, though a spokesman said the armed forces "stand ever ready to assist should a request for support be received". It is understood that the transport secretary, Chris Grayling, chaired a top-level meeting yesterday in which defence and police chiefs, together with Home Office officials, discussed how to handle the threat of drones in the future. The aviation minister, Liz Sugg, is also due to meet the heads of the UK’s major airports next week to discuss the states of their own defences, and what they plan to put in place in future.

The airports are expected to announce significant investments in further anti-drone systems, though not all will necessarily be in the form and scale of those deployed at the two London airports. A Gatwick spokeswoman said the airport had "invested several million pounds in new equipment which provides a similar level of reassurance as offered by the armed forces". A Heathrow spokeswoman said:"The safety of our passengers and colleagues remains our top priority. Working closely with relevant authorities including the Met police, we are constantly looking at the best technologies that help remove the threat of drones."

Last week officers received 115 reports of drone sightings in the area, including 93 that had been confirmed as coming from credible people including a airport staff. Some reports of drones in the area may have involved the police’s own craft. It was absolutely certain that a drone had been flying near the airport’s runways during the three-day disruption. Police are still searching for those responsible.

It can be inferred from Paragraph 3 that______.

The UK’s largest airports are set to spend millions of pounds on anti-drone equipment as they seek to protect themselves from attacks such as the one that grounded about 1,000 flights into and out of Gatwick airport during the Christmas period.

It emerged yesterday that the country’s two busiest hubs, Heathrow and Gatwick, had already bought in their own military-grade anti-drone apparatus. The owners of both airports have invested millions in the equipment after about 140,000 passengers were affected by unprecedented disruption to Gatwick. The military had to be called in amid a series of reported drone sightings over the course of three days and it is believed that the Israeli-developed Drone Dome system, which can detect and jam communications between a drone and its operator, was deployed.

While Gatwick would not say what equipment had been installed, a spokeswoman said the airport’s owners had bought a system that provided a similar level of protection and that had been installed about a week ago. A Heathrow spokeswoman also confirmed that reports of investment in military-grade anti-drone equipment there were accurate.

On Wednesday, the Ministry of Defence confirmed it had withdrawn its resources from Gatwick, though a spokesman said the armed forces "stand ever ready to assist should a request for support be received". It is understood that the transport secretary, Chris Grayling, chaired a top-level meeting yesterday in which defence and police chiefs, together with Home Office officials, discussed how to handle the threat of drones in the future. The aviation minister, Liz Sugg, is also due to meet the heads of the UK’s major airports next week to discuss the states of their own defences, and what they plan to put in place in future.

The airports are expected to announce significant investments in further anti-drone systems, though not all will necessarily be in the form and scale of those deployed at the two London airports. A Gatwick spokeswoman said the airport had "invested several million pounds in new equipment which provides a similar level of reassurance as offered by the armed forces". A Heathrow spokeswoman said:"The safety of our passengers and colleagues remains our top priority. Working closely with relevant authorities including the Met police, we are constantly looking at the best technologies that help remove the threat of drones."

Last week officers received 115 reports of drone sightings in the area, including 93 that had been confirmed as coming from credible people including a airport staff. Some reports of drones in the area may have involved the police’s own craft. It was absolutely certain that a drone had been flying near the airport’s runways during the three-day disruption. Police are still searching for those responsible.

The statement of the Ministry of Defence implies that the armed forces will______.

The UK’s largest airports are set to spend millions of pounds on anti-drone equipment as they seek to protect themselves from attacks such as the one that grounded about 1,000 flights into and out of Gatwick airport during the Christmas period.

It emerged yesterday that the country’s two busiest hubs, Heathrow and Gatwick, had already bought in their own military-grade anti-drone apparatus. The owners of both airports have invested millions in the equipment after about 140,000 passengers were affected by unprecedented disruption to Gatwick. The military had to be called in amid a series of reported drone sightings over the course of three days and it is believed that the Israeli-developed Drone Dome system, which can detect and jam communications between a drone and its operator, was deployed.

While Gatwick would not say what equipment had been installed, a spokeswoman said the airport’s owners had bought a system that provided a similar level of protection and that had been installed about a week ago. A Heathrow spokeswoman also confirmed that reports of investment in military-grade anti-drone equipment there were accurate.

On Wednesday, the Ministry of Defence confirmed it had withdrawn its resources from Gatwick, though a spokesman said the armed forces "stand ever ready to assist should a request for support be received". It is understood that the transport secretary, Chris Grayling, chaired a top-level meeting yesterday in which defence and police chiefs, together with Home Office officials, discussed how to handle the threat of drones in the future. The aviation minister, Liz Sugg, is also due to meet the heads of the UK’s major airports next week to discuss the states of their own defences, and what they plan to put in place in future.

The airports are expected to announce significant investments in further anti-drone systems, though not all will necessarily be in the form and scale of those deployed at the two London airports. A Gatwick spokeswoman said the airport had "invested several million pounds in new equipment which provides a similar level of reassurance as offered by the armed forces". A Heathrow spokeswoman said:"The safety of our passengers and colleagues remains our top priority. Working closely with relevant authorities including the Met police, we are constantly looking at the best technologies that help remove the threat of drones."

Last week officers received 115 reports of drone sightings in the area, including 93 that had been confirmed as coming from credible people including a airport staff. Some reports of drones in the area may have involved the police’s own craft. It was absolutely certain that a drone had been flying near the airport’s runways during the three-day disruption. Police are still searching for those responsible.

According to Paragraph 5, Gatwick and Heathrow is determined to______.

The UK’s largest airports are set to spend millions of pounds on anti-drone equipment as they seek to protect themselves from attacks such as the one that grounded about 1,000 flights into and out of Gatwick airport during the Christmas period.

It emerged yesterday that the country’s two busiest hubs, Heathrow and Gatwick, had already bought in their own military-grade anti-drone apparatus. The owners of both airports have invested millions in the equipment after about 140,000 passengers were affected by unprecedented disruption to Gatwick. The military had to be called in amid a series of reported drone sightings over the course of three days and it is believed that the Israeli-developed Drone Dome system, which can detect and jam communications between a drone and its operator, was deployed.

While Gatwick would not say what equipment had been installed, a spokeswoman said the airport’s owners had bought a system that provided a similar level of protection and that had been installed about a week ago. A Heathrow spokeswoman also confirmed that reports of investment in military-grade anti-drone equipment there were accurate.

On Wednesday, the Ministry of Defence confirmed it had withdrawn its resources from Gatwick, though a spokesman said the armed forces "stand ever ready to assist should a request for support be received". It is understood that the transport secretary, Chris Grayling, chaired a top-level meeting yesterday in which defence and police chiefs, together with Home Office officials, discussed how to handle the threat of drones in the future. The aviation minister, Liz Sugg, is also due to meet the heads of the UK’s major airports next week to discuss the states of their own defences, and what they plan to put in place in future.

The airports are expected to announce significant investments in further anti-drone systems, though not all will necessarily be in the form and scale of those deployed at the two London airports. A Gatwick spokeswoman said the airport had "invested several million pounds in new equipment which provides a similar level of reassurance as offered by the armed forces". A Heathrow spokeswoman said:"The safety of our passengers and colleagues remains our top priority. Working closely with relevant authorities including the Met police, we are constantly looking at the best technologies that help remove the threat of drones."

Last week officers received 115 reports of drone sightings in the area, including 93 that had been confirmed as coming from credible people including a airport staff. Some reports of drones in the area may have involved the police’s own craft. It was absolutely certain that a drone had been flying near the airport’s runways during the three-day disruption. Police are still searching for those responsible.

Which of the following is suggested in the last paragraph?

A cluster of state-owned power plants in north-western Greece have been spewing smoke and toxic ash over nearby villages for decades. The plants are fueled by lignite, a dirty brown coal extracted from open-pit mines that scar the local countryside. Studies have shown that mining communities suffer above-average rates of lung disease and cancer, yet jobs in other sectors are scarce in a region with chronically high unemployment.

Changes may be on the way. Kyriakos Mitsotakis, the new centre-right prime minister, has promised to shut down all of Greece’s 14 lignite-fired power stations by 2024. Fleets of wind turbines and solar panels will be rolled out across rehabilitated mining areas. Mr Mitsotakis is anxious to boost Greece’s green credentials:at present its annual carbon-equivalent emissions are a third higher than those of Portugal, a similar-sized EU member state.

Despite being blessed by abundant sunshine and strong winds that blow year-round across the Aegean sea, Greece is still a clean-energy laggard. That is mostly due to PPC, the state electricity utility, which has stuck to lignite to save money, rather than switching to natural gas and renewables. In 2017 some 70% of homes and businesses consumed electricity that was produced at PPC’s lignite-fired power stations. This year the figure may fall to 50%:small private suppliers that run natural-gas-fired plants have picked up customers fleeing PPC after Mr Mitsotakis’s government raised its electricity prices.

The prime minister has set himself a remarkably ambitious target: renewable sources are to cover 35% of Greece’s energy needs by 2030. That would mean tripling current wind and solar output, at a cost of around €40bn. Consultants predict a bonanza for foreign investors:Chinese, American, Spanish and Italian companies already own Greek wind and solar installations and are acquiring licences to build more.

Oddly, they will face strong opposition from Greece’s increasingly active environmental movement. It takes up to seven years for a licence for a wind park to be granted;many applications are rejected by specialist judges at the council of state, Greece’s highest legal body.

Apostolos Pantelis, a hill-walker, is campaigning against plans to build wind parks on mountain ridges in the remote Agrafa region, a refuge for rare griffon vultures, brown bears and wolves. Greece’s environment is "too fragile" to sustain such big projects, he says. New roads would erode the mountainsides and noisy, 200m-high turbines would scare away its wildlife. He says that "people used to think wind energy would be beneficial for tourism. But it just ruins the view."

The Greece government is going to______in north-western Greece.

A cluster of state-owned power plants in north-western Greece have been spewing smoke and toxic ash over nearby villages for decades. The plants are fueled by lignite, a dirty brown coal extracted from open-pit mines that scar the local countryside. Studies have shown that mining communities suffer above-average rates of lung disease and cancer, yet jobs in other sectors are scarce in a region with chronically high unemployment.

Changes may be on the way. Kyriakos Mitsotakis, the new centre-right prime minister, has promised to shut down all of Greece’s 14 lignite-fired power stations by 2024. Fleets of wind turbines and solar panels will be rolled out across rehabilitated mining areas. Mr Mitsotakis is anxious to boost Greece’s green credentials:at present its annual carbon-equivalent emissions are a third higher than those of Portugal, a similar-sized EU member state.

Despite being blessed by abundant sunshine and strong winds that blow year-round across the Aegean sea, Greece is still a clean-energy laggard. That is mostly due to PPC, the state electricity utility, which has stuck to lignite to save money, rather than switching to natural gas and renewables. In 2017 some 70% of homes and businesses consumed electricity that was produced at PPC’s lignite-fired power stations. This year the figure may fall to 50%:small private suppliers that run natural-gas-fired plants have picked up customers fleeing PPC after Mr Mitsotakis’s government raised its electricity prices.

The prime minister has set himself a remarkably ambitious target: renewable sources are to cover 35% of Greece’s energy needs by 2030. That would mean tripling current wind and solar output, at a cost of around €40bn. Consultants predict a bonanza for foreign investors:Chinese, American, Spanish and Italian companies already own Greek wind and solar installations and are acquiring licences to build more.

Oddly, they will face strong opposition from Greece’s increasingly active environmental movement. It takes up to seven years for a licence for a wind park to be granted;many applications are rejected by specialist judges at the council of state, Greece’s highest legal body.

Apostolos Pantelis, a hill-walker, is campaigning against plans to build wind parks on mountain ridges in the remote Agrafa region, a refuge for rare griffon vultures, brown bears and wolves. Greece’s environment is "too fragile" to sustain such big projects, he says. New roads would erode the mountainsides and noisy, 200m-high turbines would scare away its wildlife. He says that "people used to think wind energy would be beneficial for tourism. But it just ruins the view."

Which of the following is true of PPC?

A cluster of state-owned power plants in north-western Greece have been spewing smoke and toxic ash over nearby villages for decades. The plants are fueled by lignite, a dirty brown coal extracted from open-pit mines that scar the local countryside. Studies have shown that mining communities suffer above-average rates of lung disease and cancer, yet jobs in other sectors are scarce in a region with chronically high unemployment.

Changes may be on the way. Kyriakos Mitsotakis, the new centre-right prime minister, has promised to shut down all of Greece’s 14 lignite-fired power stations by 2024. Fleets of wind turbines and solar panels will be rolled out across rehabilitated mining areas. Mr Mitsotakis is anxious to boost Greece’s green credentials:at present its annual carbon-equivalent emissions are a third higher than those of Portugal, a similar-sized EU member state.

Despite being blessed by abundant sunshine and strong winds that blow year-round across the Aegean sea, Greece is still a clean-energy laggard. That is mostly due to PPC, the state electricity utility, which has stuck to lignite to save money, rather than switching to natural gas and renewables. In 2017 some 70% of homes and businesses consumed electricity that was produced at PPC’s lignite-fired power stations. This year the figure may fall to 50%:small private suppliers that run natural-gas-fired plants have picked up customers fleeing PPC after Mr Mitsotakis’s government raised its electricity prices.

The prime minister has set himself a remarkably ambitious target: renewable sources are to cover 35% of Greece’s energy needs by 2030. That would mean tripling current wind and solar output, at a cost of around €40bn. Consultants predict a bonanza for foreign investors:Chinese, American, Spanish and Italian companies already own Greek wind and solar installations and are acquiring licences to build more.

Oddly, they will face strong opposition from Greece’s increasingly active environmental movement. It takes up to seven years for a licence for a wind park to be granted;many applications are rejected by specialist judges at the council of state, Greece’s highest legal body.

Apostolos Pantelis, a hill-walker, is campaigning against plans to build wind parks on mountain ridges in the remote Agrafa region, a refuge for rare griffon vultures, brown bears and wolves. Greece’s environment is "too fragile" to sustain such big projects, he says. New roads would erode the mountainsides and noisy, 200m-high turbines would scare away its wildlife. He says that "people used to think wind energy would be beneficial for tourism. But it just ruins the view."

The prime minister’s energy reform may benefit______.

A cluster of state-owned power plants in north-western Greece have been spewing smoke and toxic ash over nearby villages for decades. The plants are fueled by lignite, a dirty brown coal extracted from open-pit mines that scar the local countryside. Studies have shown that mining communities suffer above-average rates of lung disease and cancer, yet jobs in other sectors are scarce in a region with chronically high unemployment.

Changes may be on the way. Kyriakos Mitsotakis, the new centre-right prime minister, has promised to shut down all of Greece’s 14 lignite-fired power stations by 2024. Fleets of wind turbines and solar panels will be rolled out across rehabilitated mining areas. Mr Mitsotakis is anxious to boost Greece’s green credentials:at present its annual carbon-equivalent emissions are a third higher than those of Portugal, a similar-sized EU member state.

Despite being blessed by abundant sunshine and strong winds that blow year-round across the Aegean sea, Greece is still a clean-energy laggard. That is mostly due to PPC, the state electricity utility, which has stuck to lignite to save money, rather than switching to natural gas and renewables. In 2017 some 70% of homes and businesses consumed electricity that was produced at PPC’s lignite-fired power stations. This year the figure may fall to 50%:small private suppliers that run natural-gas-fired plants have picked up customers fleeing PPC after Mr Mitsotakis’s government raised its electricity prices.

The prime minister has set himself a remarkably ambitious target: renewable sources are to cover 35% of Greece’s energy needs by 2030. That would mean tripling current wind and solar output, at a cost of around €40bn. Consultants predict a bonanza for foreign investors:Chinese, American, Spanish and Italian companies already own Greek wind and solar installations and are acquiring licences to build more.

Oddly, they will face strong opposition from Greece’s increasingly active environmental movement. It takes up to seven years for a licence for a wind park to be granted;many applications are rejected by specialist judges at the council of state, Greece’s highest legal body.

Apostolos Pantelis, a hill-walker, is campaigning against plans to build wind parks on mountain ridges in the remote Agrafa region, a refuge for rare griffon vultures, brown bears and wolves. Greece’s environment is "too fragile" to sustain such big projects, he says. New roads would erode the mountainsides and noisy, 200m-high turbines would scare away its wildlife. He says that "people used to think wind energy would be beneficial for tourism. But it just ruins the view."

Mr. Apostolos Pantelis objects to wind-park plans because he______.

A cluster of state-owned power plants in north-western Greece have been spewing smoke and toxic ash over nearby villages for decades. The plants are fueled by lignite, a dirty brown coal extracted from open-pit mines that scar the local countryside. Studies have shown that mining communities suffer above-average rates of lung disease and cancer, yet jobs in other sectors are scarce in a region with chronically high unemployment.

Changes may be on the way. Kyriakos Mitsotakis, the new centre-right prime minister, has promised to shut down all of Greece’s 14 lignite-fired power stations by 2024. Fleets of wind turbines and solar panels will be rolled out across rehabilitated mining areas. Mr Mitsotakis is anxious to boost Greece’s green credentials:at present its annual carbon-equivalent emissions are a third higher than those of Portugal, a similar-sized EU member state.

Despite being blessed by abundant sunshine and strong winds that blow year-round across the Aegean sea, Greece is still a clean-energy laggard. That is mostly due to PPC, the state electricity utility, which has stuck to lignite to save money, rather than switching to natural gas and renewables. In 2017 some 70% of homes and businesses consumed electricity that was produced at PPC’s lignite-fired power stations. This year the figure may fall to 50%:small private suppliers that run natural-gas-fired plants have picked up customers fleeing PPC after Mr Mitsotakis’s government raised its electricity prices.

The prime minister has set himself a remarkably ambitious target: renewable sources are to cover 35% of Greece’s energy needs by 2030. That would mean tripling current wind and solar output, at a cost of around €40bn. Consultants predict a bonanza for foreign investors:Chinese, American, Spanish and Italian companies already own Greek wind and solar installations and are acquiring licences to build more.

Oddly, they will face strong opposition from Greece’s increasingly active environmental movement. It takes up to seven years for a licence for a wind park to be granted;many applications are rejected by specialist judges at the council of state, Greece’s highest legal body.

Apostolos Pantelis, a hill-walker, is campaigning against plans to build wind parks on mountain ridges in the remote Agrafa region, a refuge for rare griffon vultures, brown bears and wolves. Greece’s environment is "too fragile" to sustain such big projects, he says. New roads would erode the mountainsides and noisy, 200m-high turbines would scare away its wildlife. He says that "people used to think wind energy would be beneficial for tourism. But it just ruins the view."

Which of the following is the best title for the text?