PrepTest 146, Section 2, Question 19

What we’re looking for

Working the answers

• A

  This goes too far into the future. A problem with the current sites doesn't establish that all future electrical needs must be met through other sources. The pipeline network could change, for example, or residents' attitudes could eventually change. The present restrictions don't rule out every future route to using natural gas.

• B

  Opposing construction doesn't mean moving away. The analyst gives us a requirement for locating a new station: residents must not oppose it. We aren't told how many people would relocate if a station were built, or even that anyone would.

• C
  Correct

  Here's the possibility I hadn't fully worked through: extend the pipelines to other bodies of water. The current network reaches water only at the three locations where residents would oppose a major project. Expanding that network could bring a pipeline near a different lake whose residents don't object.

  C doesn't promise that expansion will produce a suitable site. The new location would still need water, transmission lines, and no resident opposition. It says expansion is required to get beyond the problem with the current locations. That is much narrower than A's claim that the country must turn to other energy sources altogether.

• D

  We were given requirements for new stations, not a description of every existing station. A station might already stand near one of these bodies of water. D also changes 'three of our large bodies of water' into 'the three largest.' We weren't given that ranking either.

• E

  The country has extensive transmission lines, but that doesn't tell us how residents feel about constructing additional ones. Opposition to a station doesn't establish either support for or opposition to new lines. E adds a comparison of residents' attitudes that the analyst never supplies.