Analyst: Any new natural-gas-powered

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Strong: have to be met14% picked this

   Future electrical needs will have to be met by alternatives to

   This captures the "we're screwed" sentiment, but it goes too far. (It is no accident that it is very similar to what we were looking for, but wrong, and placed in the position of answer choice A. There are a lot of Inference questions with a very tempting trap answer A.) If we say "we're screwed; we can't build any new natural-gas powered stations", that doesn't allow us to infer that in the future we will have to meet our energy needs with non-gas alternatives. A) Do we already have existing natural gas stations? If so, then we could still meet some of our future energy needs with natural gas. We're just saying we're screwed when it comes to building new stations. B) Are we already needing more energy than those existing natural gas stations can provide? If not, then future energy needs could continue to be met with our existing natural gas stations. For multiple reasons, this harshly worded prediction does not need to be true.

   14%
2. B

   Out of Scope: move away2% picked this

   If a new natural-gas-powered electrical station is built in a region, many residents will move

   We only know that residents near three large bodies of water would oppose construction. We wouldn't even be able to say that many of THEM would move way. We just know they would oppose.

   2%
3. C

   Correct62% picked this

   No site would be suitable for constructing a natural-gas-powered electrical station unless the existing system of

   Why this is right

   Unless = if not, so we can think about this as, if the existing system of pipelines is NOT expanded, then no site for a new station is suitable. This also resonates with our "We're screwed" prediction, but why is it bringing up "if we don't expand our existing system"? Well, it turns out we weren't as hopeless as we may have thought in a first read of the stimulus. We knew we needed four things: - transmission lines / pipeline / large body of water nearby - cooperative residents We thought we were screwed, because currently, the only place where we can get pipeline and large body of water to be near each other is in places where residents would oppose. We can't change how residents near these three large bodies of water would feel. We can't invent new large bodies of water, but there might be other large bodies of water that already exist. The language was tricky: our pipelines run in the vicinity of only three of our large bodies. That's not saying "our pipelines run in the vicinity of our only three large bodies of water." Only three ≠ conditional. It's like me whining, "Mom you only gave me three pancakes?" It's using "only" as an adverb that means a paltry, meager amount. It's possible that our country has many other large bodies of water. We already have an extensive system of transmission lines. If we expanded our pipelines so that a pipeline was near one of these other large bodies of water, then we might have cooperative residents (or no residents) nearby. So there is still a CHANCE that we could find a suitable site to build a new station. But, as this answer says, if we're stuck with the existing pipelines, then we're screwed.

   Skill tested: Most Supported · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   62%
4. D

   Out of Scope19% picked this

   There currently is no natural-gas-powered electrical generation station near any of the three largest

   Out of Scope: current stations Out of Scope: largest bodies We only got information about building new stations. We don't know anything about existing stations. And we only got information about three of our large bodies of water. We don't know anything about "the three largest bodies of water".

   19%
5. E

   Unsupported4% picked this

   Many residents who would oppose the construction of a new natural-gas-powered electrical station in their region would not oppose the construction

   Unsupported: speculating opinion Only One Mentioned ≠ Only One We only know that residents in these three areas would oppose building a natural gas station. The fact that the passage only mentioned their opposition to natural gas stations doesn't tell us that natural gas stations are the only thing they oppose.

   4%