In only 50 years, the world’s consumption of raw materials has nearly quadrupled, to more than 100 billion tons. Less than 9% of this is reused. Batteries of old vehicles contain materials such as lithium, cobalt, manganese and nickel that are pricey and can be hard to obtain. Supply chains are long and complicated. Buyers’ risks are being aggravated by their suppliers’ poor environmental and labour standards. Reusing materials makes sense. Once batteries reach the ends of their lives, they should go back to a factory where their ingredients can be recovered and put into new batteries.

With reference to the above passage, the following assumptions have been made:

I. Automobile factories are examples of the circular economy.

II. Economic growth is compatible with circular use of mineral resources.

Which of the above assumptions is/are valid?

The correct answer is II only.

Analysis of Assumption I:
Assumption I states that "Automobile factories are examples of the circular economy."
The passage mentions that battery materials should go back to a factory to be recovered and reused in new batteries. This is a recommendation or an ideal state described for the future ("they should go back..."). The passage does not assume or state that present automobile factories currently operate as examples of a circular economy. In fact, it highlights that less than 9% of materials are currently reused. Therefore, Assumption I is not a valid assumption based on the passage.

Analysis of Assumption II:
Assumption II states that "Economic growth is compatible with circular use of mineral resources."
The passage discusses the massive increase in global raw material consumption (quadrupled to over 100 billion tons) due to industrial and economic growth, while pointing out the challenges of supply chain risks, high costs, and environmental/labour concerns. It argues that "Reusing materials makes sense" and suggests recovering battery ingredients to support continued manufacturing of new batteries. This implies that economic activities and resource demand can be sustained efficiently alongside a circular economy framework (reusing and recycling mineral resources like lithium, cobalt, manganese, and nickel). Hence, Assumption II is valid.

Thus, only Assumption II is valid.