What is the main conclusion?
Nuclear power divides opinion more sharply than almost any energy source. Its opponents point to rare but severe accidents and to the problem of storing waste for thousands of years. Supporters point to its low carbon emissions and constant output. It is tempting to resolve the dispute by asking which is the lesser evil, but the question is badly framed. The real choice is rarely between nuclear and a perfect alternative; it is between nuclear and whatever would in practice supply the same power. If that is gas or coal, the emissions are far higher and the daily harms from air pollution are considerable. If renewables with storage can fill the gap at a lower cost, nuclear loses its advantage. The answer is therefore a matter of local facts, not of principle.
Answer and explanation
Correct answer: E. Whether nuclear power is preferable depends on what would otherwise supply the energy
- Step 1: The last sentence says the answer is a matter of local facts and the argument turns on the realistic alternative.
- Step 2: The only choice consistent with this is "Whether nuclear power is preferable depends on what would otherwise supply the energy".
Answer
Whether nuclear power is preferable depends on what would otherwise supply the energy.
Why not the others: The author takes no universal position for or against nuclear, and gives no figures on accident frequency.
Practise more Energy.
Free questions with an explanation for every one, and full timed LNAT mock tests.