fantasy - DS was told he wrote too little, so clearly no easy way of scoring geography marks.
But having a really close look through the mark scheme was useful. There's so much they won't get marks for, and a lot of marks awarded for things that are never mentioned in the question - like using examples from case studies, and using lots of joining words to explain how things cause other things. DS lost a mark for saying "The graph shows that Brazil has 80% of its energy from renewables but the US only has 20%" when apparently he should have said "The graph shows that Brazil has 80% of its energy from renewables, which is more than the US has, at 20%" - his use of the word "only" was apparently not sufficient to indicate that he knew 80% was more than 20% 
. Either the mark scheme is written by an idiot, or DS's teacher is an idiot IMO. I'm hoping it's the teacher and the real examiners will be a bit more sensible over things like that.
Getting top marks in the longer questions in particular seems to be very much about exam technique not knowledge or understanding. On the plus side, I think exam technique is probably quicker to learn than the whole course content so am trying to get DS to do some more practice papers, having now learned that he needs to stick to bullet points for the short questions so that he has time to write enough detail on the long ones.