Sentence Correction

Over 75% of the energy produced in France derives from nuclear power, while in Germany it is just over 33%.
A) while in Germany it is just over 33%
B) compared to Germany, which uses just over 33%
C) whereas nuclear poweraccounts for just over 33% of the energy produced in Germany
D) whereas just over 33% of the energy comes from nuclear power in Germany
E) compared with the energy from nuclear power in Germany, where it is just over 33%.

I have the following doubts with these questions:

a) In choice C, the subject in the first part of the comparison is "over 75 percent of the energy produced in France", while the subject in the second part is "nuclear power". How can these be parallel? Also, based on the explanations of other questions, the compared clauses should be parallel in structure, so the second clause should be something like "(whereas) just over 33 percent of the energy produced in Germany comes from nuclear power". As you can see, now both structures are similar and the things that are compared are logically parallel (percentage vs. percentage). I don't understand, how C can be correct.

If you see choice E, my analysis would be correct. There, the sentence compares "over 75 percent of the energy produced in France" vs. "energy from nuclear power in Germany": not parallel.

b) In choice E, the OE says that "it" is ambiguous, and Ron Purewal (MGMAT) mentions that "it" doesn't have an antecedent. But I think that "it" refers to "the energy from nuclear power in Germany". I think that there is no problem with "it". If you replace the pronoun for that noun, it works.

Please, your help with this problem.

Applying your same logic, the first part is talking about energy produced, so the second part should also talk about energy produced. "Energy produced in France" is parallel to "Energy produced in Germany. " NO pronoun with any ambiguous antecedent, and mind you there are two clear antecedents. I would definitely go with "C"

Funny though. I couldn't spot this in the test either Thats why this forum rocks !

chufus wrote:Applying your same logic, the first part is talking about energy produced, so the second part should also talk about energy produced. "Energy produced in France" is parallel to "Energy produced in Germany. " NO pronoun with any ambiguous antecedent, and mind you there are two clear antecedents. I would definitely go with "C"

Ok, but in my opinion "Energy produced in Germany " should be a subject, not the object of a preposition. Am I right?

arpita@gurome wrote:In (C) whether nuclear power is the subject or the object of the second sentence, the fact remains that the comparison is between the percentage of energy from nuclear power in France and the percentage of energy from nuclear power in France.

(E) is incorrect because "it" does not have a clear antecedent. "It" can refer to "nuclear power" or "energy". (E) is also verbose.

Thank you Arpita! That's the confirmation I needed!

arpita@gurome wrote:In (C) whether nuclear power is the subject or the object of the second sentence, the fact remains that the comparison is between the percentage of energy from nuclear power in France and the percentage of energy from nuclear power in France.

(E) is incorrect because "it" does not have a clear antecedent. "It" can refer to "nuclear power" or "energy". (E) is also verbose.

Arpita, I have an additional question:
You said that "it" can refer to "nuclear power" or "energy". However, "the energy from nuclear power in Germany" is a noun phrase. So, "it" refers to that noun phrase. That's why I think that "it" is not ambiguous in E. If you replace the pronoun for that phrase, the sentence makes sense.

Also, ok, I understand that it is not necessary that "the percentage of energy from nuclear power in France" be subject of the second clause in C. So, based on that logic, would it be correct if choice E were like this:

E) compared with the energy from nuclear power, which accounts for just over 33% of the energy produced in Germany.