PrepTest 144

Incorrect. This answer addresses the second consideration—is this method better for the environment than our current methods? If dumping sewer sludge hurts the environment, then using it to generate oil would thus be better for the environment.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Bizarro Argument Evaluation

Stimulus Summary:
Problem Ð We need energy
Solution 1 Ð Nuclear
Problem Ð It's dangerous
Solution 2 Ð A new oil made from sewage sludge, which can be used with renewable energy to meet energy needs and protect environment

Answer Anticipation:
The argument concludes that a new solution—oil from sewer sludge—can help us to meet our energy needs without the environmental harm from our current options. The argument does present information that this sewer sludge oil can provide power, but it fails to establish that it can generate enough power without damaging the environment. Any answer that raises a consideration about either of these—the sewer sludge being a viable replacement to current sources of energy; the sewer sludge not damaging the environment—will serve to help us evaluate the argument and will thus be incorrect.

Answer Explanation:
It appears as if sewer sludge is generated in the normal process of dealing with sewage, so the process of creating it is immaterial to whether turning it into a source of fuel will provide sufficient energy in an environmentally friendly manner. Additionally, in raising only whether the process has "improved," this answer fails to address the ways by which it may have improved. It could have improved in a way that doesn't address it's viability as a clean energy source—for example, maybe it "improved" in that it's slightly faster to create the sludge, but the speed was already higher than needed to ensure a constant flow for energy production.

Key Takeaway:
Argument Evaluation question answers can be analyzed by thinking about what the effect on the argument would be with different answers to the consideration raised. Considerations that would help in evaluating the argument should strengthen and weaken the argument, depending on what information is presented in response to it.

Incorrect. If using sewer sludge for energy isn't economically Òsustainable,Ó then this oil isn't a viable solution to energy problems. If it is sustainable, then it's a potential solution to be explored. This answer helps to evaluate the viability of the solution, so it's incorrect.

Incorrect. This answer raises a consideration that gets at the heart of the conclusion—is this energy source better for the climate than nuclear energy? If it is, then the argument is stronger; if it isn't, then it's weaker.

Incorrect. This answer, similar to (D), gets at the environmental impact of the sewer sludge oil. If the waste products are just as dangerous as the waste products of nuclear power, then the argument is weakened; if they're not, then the argument is strengthened.