Solution
Option 1 -> The passage doesn't present the curtain as one of several viable solutions; rather, it's characterized as a distraction from the actual problem.
Option 2 -> While true that a physical barrier wouldn't reduce emissions, this doesn't capture the expert's main concern as stated in the passage.
Option 3 -> This directly aligns with James Kirkham's warning that such measures are "distractions from the real issue: halting global heating" - the curtain diverts focus from addressing the root cause.
Option 4 -> The passage specifically describes the curtain as "removable," contradicting the claim that it's irreversible, and this isn't the expert's stated concern.
Hence, Option 3 -> James Kirkham explicitly cautions that technological interventions like the underwater curtain distract from tackling the fundamental problem of global heating through greenhouse gas emission reductions. Such solutions address symptoms rather than the disease itself, potentially delaying the urgent climate action needed to preserve glaciers worldwide. -> correct