PrepTest 133, Section 3, Question 8
Energy analyst: During this record-breaking heat wave, air(51 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(13 more words not shown)
- AAir-conditioning is not(11 more words not shown)
- BMost air-conditioning in(9 more words not shown)
- CMost air-conditioning systems(11 more words not shown)
- DResidents of the(15 more words not shown)
- EThe heat wave(8 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
If people turn down their air conditioners, why would the blackouts continue?
Cutting use should reduce the strain, but reducing it isn't the same as reducing it enough. Maybe other electrical demands remain high. Perhaps some cooling, such as at a hospital, cannot easily be cut. Or perhaps the request would reduce blackouts from daily to weekly: that would help, even though blackouts would still occur.
Those are possibilities. The question asks us to explain the particular tension in the passage: blackouts will probably continue even if residents cooperate with the request to use less air-conditioning at home. We must keep that cooperation in place. Saying people will ignore the request would dodge the situation we're supposed to explain.
What we’re looking for
My initial thought is that the reduction might help without completely solving the problem. Let's look for a fact showing why enough demand could remain to overload the grid.
Working the answers
- A
This is relevant: other significant uses of electricity could help keep demand high. But we don't learn how large those other demands are relative to the reduction, or why cutting the identified source of the overload would leave blackouts likely. Keep A in mind, then see whether another answer speaks more directly to what the request actually changes.
- BCorrect
The request is aimed at homes, while most of the region's air-conditioning serves businesses and factories. So even if residents cooperate, most air-conditioning use falls outside the request. That makes it much easier to understand why the main strain could remain during the heat wave.
The crucial distinction is where the cooling happens. Cutting household use can help without reaching the largest share of the use causing the problem. This connects the limited request to the continued blackouts more directly than A's general statement that other electrical demands exist.
- C
Could be redesigned doesn't mean has been redesigned. More efficient systems might offer another solution, but the scenario only gives us residents reducing their use. C doesn't explain why blackouts would continue after that particular response.
- D
The passage already asks what happens even if residents heed the request. Whether they are likely to cooperate is a different question. We need to explain continued blackouts with cooperation, not replace cooperation with refusal.
- E
If the heat wave ends, the analyst's exception comes into play. But we need to explain why blackouts remain likely while the heat continues despite reduced household use. A forecast that the heat will soon end doesn't explain the relationship between those two facts.
More Paradox questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Paradox questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.