Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Technological improvements and reduced equipment costs have [#permalink]
30 Jul 2006, 11:59
0% (00:00) correct
0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
Technological improvements and reduced equipment costs have made converting solar energy directly into electricity far more cost-efficient in the last decade. However, the threshold of economic viability for solar power (that is, the price per barrel to which oil would have to rise in order for new solar power plants to be more economical than new oil-fired power plants) is unchanged at thirty-five dollars.
Which of the following, if true, does most to help explain why the increased cost-efficiency of solar power has not decreased its threshold of economic viability?
(A) The cost of oil has fallen dramatically.
(B) The reduction in the cost of solar-power equipment has occurred despite increased raw material costs for that equipment.
(C) Technological changes have increased the efficiency of oil-fired power plants.
(D) Most electricity is generated by coal-fired or nuclear, rather than oil-fired, power plants.
(E) When the price of oil increases, reserves of oil not previously worth exploiting become economically viable.
it's C. Fr A, even if the cost of oil has fallen dramatically, taty's beside the point: the question deals with the cost efficiency of solar power. Also, we know nothing about the cost of oil since the stimulus talks only about the price.
"Amicus Plato, sed magic amica veritas"