Cambridge O-Level Environmental Management: Energy and the Environment — Practice Questions (5014)

These are original questions written for Marlbridge, in the style and at the standard of the examination. They are not reproduced past-paper questions — examination boards hold copyright in their own papers. Use these alongside the official past papers available free from your board.

Related: Topic 2 study guide

---

Section A

1. State whether each of the following is renewable or non-renewable: coal, wind, nuclear power, hydro-electric power. [4]

2. Explain why nuclear power is classified as non-renewable even though it does not burn fossil fuel. [2]

Section B

3. A country is deciding between building a new coal power station or a wind farm. Explain two factors it should consider when choosing between them. [6]

4. Explain two factors that affect a country’s demand for energy. [4]

5. An oil tanker collides with rocks near a coastline, spilling crude oil that begins spreading toward a coral reef. Describe one cause-side factor that contributed to this type of incident and one response-side action that could reduce its impact. [4]

6. Explain two strategies a country could use to reduce its energy demand through conservation. [4]

---

Answers

1. Coal: non-renewable [1]. Wind: renewable [1]. Nuclear power: non-renewable [1]. Hydro-electric power: renewable [1].

2. Nuclear power relies on uranium, which is a finite resource formed over geological timescales far slower than it is consumed [1] — the classification depends on the finite nature of the fuel source, not on whether combustion occurs [1].

3. Environmental impact — coal produces greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution during combustion, while wind produces no emissions during generation but has a visual/land-use impact [1] [1] [1]. Reliability and cost — coal offers established, reliable infrastructure and high energy density, while wind depends on weather/geography and requires high upfront capital cost, so a country without consistently strong winds gains little from a wind farm [1] [1] [1].

4. Wealth — wealthier households and countries consume more energy per person, e.g. through more appliances, vehicles and heating/cooling [1] [1]. Climate — colder regions have higher heating demand while hotter regions have higher cooling demand, so a country’s climate directly shapes seasonal energy demand [1] [1].

5. Cause-side: shipping accidents (tanker collisions) are a recognised cause of oil pollution alongside off-shore extraction and pipeline failure [1] [1]. Response-side: booms could be deployed to contain the spill before it spreads further toward the reef, or skimmers used to physically remove oil from the water surface [1] [1].

6. Reducing consumption — improving insulation and using energy-efficient devices lowers the amount of energy needed for the same activity [1] [1]. Education for energy conservation — raising public awareness of energy-saving behaviour (e.g. turning off unused appliances) reduces demand without requiring new infrastructure [1] [1].

---

Exam technique for this topic

Build one table classifying all nine named energy resources as renewable or non-renewable before attempting any question in this topic, since nearly every question here assumes that classification is already secure. When comparing energy resources (as in Q3), always structure the answer around matched pairs of factors — an environmental point balanced against an economic or reliability point — rather than listing one-sided advantages, since Paper 2 typically asks candidates to weigh a specific energy choice for a named country or region rather than to describe resources in isolation. For oil pollution questions, keep causes (extraction, pipelines, shipping) and management strategies (MARPOL, double-hulled tankers, clean-up methods) in separate mental columns, since mixing a cause into a management answer (or vice versa) is a common way marks are dropped even when the underlying knowledge is correct.

Practising the “weigh two options” question type

Question 3’s style — choosing between two named energy options for a described scenario — recurs often in this topic and rewards a specific structure: identify the relevant factor, state how each option performs on that factor, and only then state which option that factor favours in the given scenario. Repeating this three-step structure across several factors (environmental impact, cost/reliability, land-use/geography, social acceptability) for a range of practice scenarios — a coastal country considering tidal power, a landlocked country considering solar, an economy heavily dependent on imported fuel considering domestic coal — builds the flexible comparative reasoning this topic actually tests, rather than a fixed list of pros and cons that doesn’t adapt to the specific scenario given.

Linking this topic to Topic 1

Topic 1 (Rocks and Minerals) and Topic 2 (Energy and the Environment) share a common underlying theme — the extraction and use of a natural resource, weighed against its environmental cost — so revision that explicitly connects the two topics tends to be more resilient than revising each in isolation. For example, the same rationing/sustainability logic that applies to extracting a mineral resource (using it at a rate that allows future availability) applies equally to non-renewable energy resources, and the same environmental-economic-social weighing structure used to evaluate a mining project in Topic 1 can be reused, with different specific content, to evaluate an energy resource choice in Topic 2. Practising this kind of cross-topic transfer is valuable because Paper 2’s synoptic-style questions sometimes draw on more than one topic within a single structured question.

Where marks are usually lost

• Classifying nuclear power as renewable because it doesn’t burn fossil fuel.
• Giving a generic “pollution is bad” answer instead of naming a specific impact (e.g. on coral reefs, marine mammals, birds).
• Confusing MARPOL (an international convention) with a physical clean-up method like a boom or skimmer.
• Listing energy demand factors without explaining the mechanism by which each one increases or decreases demand.