The initial causes of serious accidents at nuclear power plants have not so far been flaws in the advanced-technology portion of the plants. Rather, the initial causes have been attributed to human error, as when a worker at the Browns Mills reactor in the United States dropped a candle and started a fire, or to flaws in the plumbing, exemplified in a recent incident in Japan. Such everyday events cannot be thought unlikely to occur over the long run.
Which of the following is most strongly supported by the statements above?
(A) Now that nuclear power generation has become a part of everyday life, an ever-increasing yearly incidence of serious accidents at plants can be expected.
(B) If nuclear power plants continue in operation, a serious accident at such a plant is not improbable.
(C) The likelihood of human error at the operating consoles of nuclear power generators cannot be lessened by thoughtful design of dials, switches, and displays.
(D) The design of nuclear power plants attempts to compensate for possible failures of the materials used in their construction.
(E) No serious accident will be caused in the future by some flaw in the advanced-technology portion of a nuclear power plant.
Nuclear Plant Accident
This topic has expert replies
-
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 12:51 am
- Thanked: 1 times
The Argument is : Such Everyday events can likely to occur over the long run.
Support Statements : Human Errors, flaws in plumbing
I would go with C.
Support Statements : Human Errors, flaws in plumbing
I would go with C.
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 462
- Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:08 pm
- Thanked: 10 times
- Followed by:4 members
-
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:45 am
- Followed by:2 members