If a person chooses to walk

Answer choices

1. A

   Weakens, if anything8% picked this

   If automobile passengers who never drive walk instead of ride, there will not be fewer vehicles on the

   The author was envisioning that in the walk-when-possible world, there would be much fewer vehicles on the road, hence less emissions, hence less pollution. This answer is stressing that for the people who are riding, not driving, their decision to walk instead doesn't really have any impact on pollution, which undercuts the author's conclusion.

   8%
2. B

   Correct49% picked this

   Nonmoving running vehicles, on average, emit half as much pollution per second as moving vehicles, but the greater congestion is, the more

   Why this is right

   This suggests another change that would take place in the walk-whenever-possible world that would help to reduce pollution. In a world where people walk whenever possible, there will be fewer cars on the road and thus less congestion on the roads. This answer says that less congestion will also mean less pollution from nonmoving vehicles that are just idling. It still reinforces what we already know -- the reduction in pollution is supposed to come from their being fewer vehicles emitting pollution. But this answer is sort of saying, "You won't just get reduced pollution from the vehicles that are no longer on the road; you'll also get reduced pollution from the vehicles that are still on the road, since their car journeys will now be less congested and thus less polluting."

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

   49%
3. C

   No Impact33% picked this

   Since different vehicles can pollute at different rates, it is possible for one driver who walks to make a greater contribution to pollution

   This is incredibly weak, because it's just saying that it's possible for something to happen. It doesn't give us any indication that thing will happen. It's also telling us something we already know from common sense: vehicles vary in terms of how much pollution they emit. Taking a Prius off the road has less effect on pollution than taking a Range Rover off the road. If this answer said, "The people who could walk instead of driving tend to drive vehicles that emit more pollution than the average vehicle", that would strengthen the argument.

   33%
4. D

   Out of Scope: buses7% picked this

   On average, buses pollute more than cars do, but buses usually carry more passengers

   The evidence is only about walking rather than driving, not walking rather than taking some other mode of transportation. When the author imagines the difference between the actual world and the walk-when-possible world, he's only thinking about how fewer drivers would change things. It's not clear whether a decision to ride a bus vs. walk would make much difference on pollution, since buses tend to drive their routes regardless of how many passengers are on board.

   7%
5. E

   Weakens3% picked this

   Those who previously rode as passengers in a vehicle whose driver decides to walk instead of drive might

   This is suggesting that something else would change in the "walk-when-possible" world: people who used to be riders would now become drivers. If I decide to walk rather than drive, but then one of my normal commuting passengers is like, "Oh, for realz? Well, then I guess I'll start driving", then we haven't actually resulted in one less vehicle on the road emitting pollution.

   3%