Reading comp PrepTest 123 · Section 1 · Question 20

Passage

Questions 14-20 The following passage was written in the mid–1990s.  .        The demand for electricity in certain countries has Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Science


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Problem, solution, and problem with solution
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Problem, according to the author:
      • The demand for electricity from fossil fuels in certain countries going up drastically, hurting the environment and human health
    • Comparison of problem and solution, according to the author:
      • Unlike fossil fuels, renewable energy sources are available everywhere and do not pollute the environment
    • Examples of renewable energy solutions, according to the author:
      • Solar radiation, wind, and water power
    • Problem with the solution, according to the author:
      • The technologies for this aren’t always rolled out in a way that leads to long-term success
    • Author’s attitude: “Unfortunately” (line 3); “possible solutions” (line 11); “not always implemented successfully” (lines 20-21)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Unsuccessful example of solution
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Example of a renewable-energy project not implemented successfully, according to the author:
      • The U.S. helped Brazil install solar panels in 1992
      • The project failed because Brazil didn’t develop local production capabilities for the solar panels, so only earned enough to break even and failed to get more investment
    • Author’s attitude: “missed an opportunity” (line 35); “precluded the long-term benefits” (line 37); “makes further investment and expansion unlikely” (lines 43-44); “remains stalled” (line 45)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Successful example of solution
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Example of a renewable-energy project that was implemented successfully, according to the author:
      • Denmark helps India build wind turbines in the 1980s
      • Succeeded because Denmark encouraged local involvement, allowing for snowballing profitability
    • Comparison between successful and unsuccessful examples, according to the author:
      • Unlike the U.S., Denmark encouraged local involvement at all levels
    • Author’s attitude: “avoided these pitfalls” (line 46); “success” (line 55); “importance of local involvement” (line 59-60); “good chance of remaining competitive and profitable for the long run” (lines 61-62)

Main Point: Using renewable energy sources is a potential way to address growing energy needs in certain countries, but there are pitfalls that need to be avoided by ensuring local involvement in all stages of the project.

Key Lines?

Lines 3-5 - Problem

Lines 9-12 - A possible solution

Lines 19-21 - Problem/limitation of the solution

Line 22 - An example of the solution failing introduced

Line 46 - An example of the solution working introduced

Meta-Structure?

Problem/Solution: This passage explicitly falls into the Problem/Solution Meta-Structure, with the author highlighting “possible solutions to the problems” of increased energy demands in Lines 11-12. When this Meta-Structure is present, the author’s proposed solution — or the author’s opinion of the central solution — constitutes the main point.

Interestingly here, the author brings up a possible solution but highlights a problem with it. The author notes that, while renewable energy could solve the energy demand problem, the long-term implementation of renewable energy projects isn’t always done successfully (Lines 19-21). The author then goes on to use two examples to illustrate how the implementation of such projects can go right and wrong. These examples illustrate the key difference that can explain the different outcomes — the involvement of local communities at all levels (Lines 58-62). Since the author describes the problem with the solution and how to address that problem, that should also be reflected in the main point.

Examples: This passage relies heavily on the discussion of two examples, each of which takes up an entire paragraph. In Paragraph 2, the author offers an example of renewable energy being implemented unsuccessfully, explaining that this happened because short-term savings were prioritized over developing the local production capacity for solar energy (Lines 36-40). In Paragraph 3, the author shows an example of renewable energy being implemented successfully. Unlike the first example, this renewable energy project featured local involvement at all stages of the implementation (Lines 58-62). Since these examples are both very involved and key to demonstrating the author’s main point, they’re likely to feature heavily in the questions.

Last Thoughts?

Being sure to keep the elements of the two examples separate in our minds will be key to finding relevant information quickly, so be sure that you do so. Or, if you have trouble remembering these kinds of details, try writing down key elements of each so that you can quickly identify which example a question or answer is talking about!

Question prompt

Which one of the Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: A

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Science

Strategy Overview

Review the author’s claim in the last sentence of the passage, then find an answer that undermines it

Answer Anticipation

We'll approach Weaken questions in Reading Comprehension in a very similar manner as we would in Logical Reasoning. We can review the excerpt from the passage, just like we'd carefully read an argument in LR. We’ll then interrogate the claim for any weaknesses, as the correct answer on both RC and LR will probably weaken the claim by exploiting a problem. Additionally, causation flaws are commonplace on Weaken questions in both RC and LR, so we should be especially mindful of those.So our first step should be to head back to the last sentence in the passage to find out which of the author’s assertions this question is talking about. Doing so, we can see that the sentence starts in Line 58. The author claims that local involvement at all levels of the project is what allowed the Danish wind project in India to succeed and result in a good chance at long-term profitability while the project in Brazil failed and didn’t result in such profitability. In other words, the author explains why the India project succeeded while the Brazil project failed. The author also predicts continued profitability for the India project.When a Weaken question asks you to weaken the author’s explanation for a phenomenon (in either RC or LR), the correct answer will usually bring up an alternative explanation. And when a Weaken question asks you to weaken an Author’s prediction, the correct answer will usually highlight a change in the future that calls that prediction into question. So the correct answer might tie an alternative explanation for the profitability of the project in India to a future change that calls that profitability into question.That said, many things could feasibly weaken the author’s assertion, so we should keep an open mind as we progress through the answer choices. We'll start by asking ourselves, "Does this make the author’s explanation of the India project’s long-term profitability less convincing?"

Answer choices

  1. A
    The profitability of the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem

    (A) Does this make the author’s explanation of the India project’s long-term profitability less convincing?

    Yes! This answer provides an alternative explanation for the success of the project in India, and one that calls into question the author’s prediction that the project has a “good chance of remaining competitive and profitable for the long run.” If the project in India was profitable because of temporary subsidies from the Indian government, then that — rather than local involvement at all levels — could explain the success. And those subsidies being temporary calls into question whether that profitability will continue once they end. This answer undermines the author’s claim, so this is the correct answer.

  2. B
    The Danish energy agency Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Does this make the author’s explanation of the India project’s long-term profitability less convincing?

    This is a a very tempting answer! This one does present an alternative explanation of the short-term profitability of the project in India over the one in Brazil. However, this doesn’t weaken the author’s prediction that the India project will remain profitable in the long term. Even if the Danish invested more money into the project initially, there is still a lot of enthusiasm and private investment in India. This answer choice doesn’t give us any reason to believe that will change, so we don’t have any reason to doubt the author’s prediction about continued profitability of the project.

  3. C
    Indian firms are not Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Does this make the author’s explanation of the India project’s long-term profitability less convincing?

    Nope. If anything, a lack of regulation requiring fees to be limited would suggest that a running renewable energy plant could continue to be profitable, which aligns with the author’s prediction that the India project will remain profitable in the long term.

  4. D
    Environmental pollutants are produced Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Does this make the author’s explanation of the India project’s long-term profitability less convincing?

    No — this answer choice brings up that wind turbines might lead to some pollution. But, interestingly, the author’s claim in the concluding lines has nothing to do with the initial problem of pollution. Instead, it’s about the competitiveness and profitability of the renewable energy project in India. As such, this answer about pollution is irrelevant to the atuhor’s claims. And, in any case, the wind turbines’ pollution doesn’t undermine the author’s overall claim that they’re better for the environment, as the fossil fuels might entail far more pollution than wind turbines.

  5. E
    New technology is poised Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Does this make the author’s explanation of the India project’s long-term profitability less convincing?

    This is a tempting answer. After all, if fossil fuels pollute less, doesn’t that mean wind turbines could be less profitable? Not necessarily, as this new technology could drive up the cost of fossil fuel-based energy significantly! While this answer does highlight a change in the future, it’s not directly related to the profitability of the wind turbine plants as there are too many variables and open questions about how it’ll affect the cost of fossil fuel-based electricity, making this answer is incorrect.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A Credited 67%
  2. B 24%
  3. C 3%
  4. D 3%
  5. E 3%

Deeper help

Ask follow-ups on any step

Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.

Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.

Discussion

  • A v D 5 replies

    Started by AllisonJ

  • Why not B? 5 replies

    Started by Nishant-Varma

  • Please explain 6 replies

    Started by Steph

View all discussions Start a discussion