Critical Reasoning

In response to the increasing cost of producing energy through traditional means, such as combustion, many utility companies have begun investing in renewable energy sources, chiefly wind and solar power, hoping someday to rely on them completely and thus lower energy costs. The utility companies claim that although these sources require significant initial capital investment, they will provide stable energy supplies at low cost. As a result, these sources will be less risky for the utilities than nonrenewable sources, such as gas, oil, and coal, whose prices can fluctuate dramatically according to availability.

The claim of the utility companies presupposes which of the following?
1 The public will embrace the development of wind and solar power.
2 No new deposits of gas, oil, and coal will be discovered in the near future.
3 Weather patterns are consistent and predictable.
4 The necessary technology for conversion to wind and solar power is not more expensive than the technology needed to create energy through combustion.
5 Obtaining energy from nonrenewable sources, such as gas, oil and coal, cannot be made less risky.

madhur_ahuja wrote:In response to the increasing cost of producing energy through traditional means, such as combustion, many utility companies have begun investing in renewable energy sources, chiefly wind and solar power, hoping someday to rely on them completely and thus lower energy costs. The utility companies claim that although these sources require significant initial capital investment, they will provide stable energy supplies at low cost. As a result, these sources will be less risky for the utilities than nonrenewable sources, such as gas, oil, and coal, whose prices can fluctuate dramatically according to availability.

The claim of the utility companies presupposes which of the following?
1 The public will embrace the development of wind and solar power.
2 No new deposits of gas, oil, and coal will be discovered in the near future.
3 Weather patterns are consistent and predictable.
4 The necessary technology for conversion to wind and solar power is not more expensive than the technology needed to create energy through combustion.
5 Obtaining energy from nonrenewable sources, such as gas, oil and coal, cannot be made less risky.

C seems to be the best bet

Why not E.....
nonrenewable risky....

i think C.

IMO E

IMO B

IMO C

The argument depends on the following premise 'they will provide stable energy supplies at low cost'

It assumes that the renewable energy resource will be stable - consistent, predictable. [/u]

Pls reply ... why not E. It is C vs E.

Companies claims is stable ... low cost - C
As a result, .... less risky ... - E

E is out of scope. The answer should be C.

acenikk wrote:E is out of scope. The answer should be C.

out of scope? Buddy ....???

madhur_ahuja wrote:In response to the increasing cost of producing energy through traditional means, such as combustion, many utility companies have begun investing in renewable energy sources, chiefly wind and solar power, hoping someday to rely on them completely and thus lower energy costs. The utility companies claim that although these sources require significant initial capital investment, they will provide stable energy supplies at low cost. As a result, these sources will be less risky for the utilities than nonrenewable sources, such as gas, oil, and coal, whose prices can fluctuate dramatically according to availability.

The claim of the utility companies presupposes which of the following?
1 The public will embrace the development of wind and solar power.
2 No new deposits of gas, oil, and coal will be discovered in the near future.
3 Weather patterns are consistent and predictable.
4 The necessary technology for conversion to wind and solar power is not more expensive than the technology needed to create energy through combustion.
5 Obtaining energy from nonrenewable sources, such as gas, oil and coal, cannot be made less risky.

Hi,

I think that is "D", because:
(A) => The claim dont say anything about the public!
(B)=> Against to the utilities companies!
(C)= Weather patterns???, i dont see a direct connection with Solar Energy and the claim dont say anything properly!
(E) => Against to the utilities companies!

In that way, (D) completes why : As a result, these sources will be less risky for the utilities than nonrenewable sources...


What do you think?

Cheers!

IMO D

The utility companies claim that although these sources require significant initial capital investment, they will provide stable energy supplies at low cost.

IMO E , dont confuse with physical process of obtaining energy from non-renewable sources.

What this option means is price fluctuation can be made less risky

A close call between D and E...

IMO - E.

D is already stated in the argument that significant initial capital investment is required but later on the renewable energy will be at much lower cost.

madhur_ahuja wrote:In response to the increasing cost of producing energy through traditional means, such as combustion, many utility companies have begun investing in renewable energy sources, chiefly wind and solar power, hoping someday to rely on them completely and thus lower energy costs. The utility companies claim that although these sources require significant initial capital investment, they will provide stable energy supplies at low cost. As a result, these sources will be less risky for the utilities than nonrenewable sources, such as gas, oil, and coal, whose prices can fluctuate dramatically according to availability.

The claim of the utility companies presupposes which of the following?
1 The public will embrace the development of wind and solar power.
2 No new deposits of gas, oil, and coal will be discovered in the near future.
3 Weather patterns are consistent and predictable.
4 The necessary technology for conversion to wind and solar power is not more expensive than the technology needed to create energy through combustion.
5 Obtaining energy from nonrenewable sources, such as gas, oil and coal, cannot be made less risky.

IMHO the answer is C. I was like many ppl here torn between C and E.

I am not 100% sure but Here is my logic:

The conclusion the author draws is the following:
"As a result, these sources will be less risky for the utilities than nonrenewable sources, such as gas, oil, and coal, whose prices can fluctuate dramatically according to availability."

So he/she says that the nonrenewable sources are risky because - its availability fluctuates .

Therefore I presume that author makes assumption that fluctuation of availability is not the case with renewable sources of energy - C: "Weather patterns are consistent and predictable" i.e the availability is not the problem.

Now lets look closely at E : "Obtaining energy from nonrenewable sources, such as gas, oil and coal, cannot be made less risky"

Now this answer talks about the riskiness of obtaining energy! what could be the riskiness of obtaining energy? I understand it something like this: it maybe risky because many people could die during the obtainment or smth like that... So in this sense E seems rather out of scope. The author is not talking about how risky the process of obtainment is with oil/coal/gas and does not compare it with obtainment process in case of renewable energy

Would love to know OA.