Should high chimneys be installed in industrial plants in order to control pollution? Arguments: 1. Yes, because tall chimneys reduce pollution at ground level around the factory. 2. No, because high chimneys increase pollution in the upper layers of the atmosphere.

Introduction / Context:
This question is about environmental pollution control in industries. The proposal is to install high chimneys. One argument supports this by pointing out reduced pollution at ground level, while the other opposes it by pointing out increased pollution higher up in the atmosphere. You must decide which arguments are strong.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Statement: High chimneys should be installed in industries.
• Argument 1: Yes, tall chimneys reduce pollution at ground level.
• Argument 2: No, tall chimneys increase pollution in the upper atmosphere.
• We assume the objective is to reduce harmful impact of industrial emissions on people and the environment.

Concept / Approach:
A strong argument can be in favour or against the proposal as long as it is realistic and relevant. Here, both near ground air quality and overall atmospheric pollution are important. Installing high chimneys solves the local problem but may shift pollutants higher, where they can contribute to regional or global issues.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Evaluate argument 1. It states that high chimneys lower pollution at ground level, which protects workers and nearby residents. Step 2: This is a valid point because high chimneys disperse emissions over a larger area and reduce direct exposure locally. So argument 1 is strong. Step 3: Evaluate argument 2. It warns that pollution is not eliminated but moved higher into the atmosphere, where it can still cause harm, for example by contributing to acid rain or climate change. Step 4: This is also a valid environmental concern. Therefore, argument 2 is strong as well.

Verification / Alternative check:
From a policy point of view, both local and global impacts must be considered. This confirms that both arguments raise important and realistic issues.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Options that treat only one of the arguments as strong ignore the other side of the environmental problem. The option that neither argument is strong is clearly wrong, because both arguments show genuine effects of high chimneys. The option that the impact cannot be judged is incorrect because basic environmental science is enough to evaluate these arguments.

Common Pitfalls:
Some students think that only one argument may be strong in every question. However, in many policy based questions, two opposing arguments can both be strong and realistic.

Final Answer:
Thus, both arguments 1 and 2 are strong, so the correct option is the one that selects both as strong.