The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in : GMAT Sentence Correction (SC)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 20 Jan 2017, 20:55

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 193
Location: India
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
WE: Operations (Insurance)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 291 [1] , given: 11

The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jan 2012, 21:43
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

5% (low)

Question Stats:

74% (01:36) correct 26% (00:38) wrong based on 246 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; rather a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.

(A) apart; rather
(B) apart, but rather
(C) apart, but rather that of
(D) apart, but that of
(E) apart; it is that of

isnt "a kind of nuclear battery ..." a clause? if yes, why cant i connect the 2 clauses with a semi colon using rather?Please explain
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by Skywalker18 on 03 Jan 2017, 11:36, edited 1 time in total.
If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Joined: 16 Sep 2010
Posts: 223
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Real Estate
GMAT 1: 740 Q48 V42
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 112 [1] , given: 2

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jan 2012, 22:05
1
KUDOS

You can not use a semicolon since you do not have two independent clauses.

The following can not stand alone on its own:

Rather a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.

It is dependent on the preceding clause. It is also unidiomatic. The idiom is - "not X, but rather Y"

So you have to stick with it. This eliminates A and E.

Parallelism eliminates C and D.

not a nuclear reactor, but rather a kind of battery. Adding that messes it all up.

Hope this helps.
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1996
Followers: 2082

Kudos [?]: 7158 [1] , given: 267

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jan 2012, 09:24
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
devinawilliam83 wrote:
The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; rather a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.

(A) apart; rather
(B) apart, but rather
(C) apart, but rather that of
(D) apart, but that of
(E) apart; it is that of

isnt "a kind of nuclear battery ..." a clause? if yes, why cant i connect the 2 clauses with a semi colon using rather?Please explain

Hi,

The prerequisite for any clause is that it must have a subject and it must have a verb. Presence of SV pair makes a clause, either a dependent or an independent.

This sentence can be divided into following clauses:

The energy source on Voyager 2
is not a nuclear reactor (Independent Clause) (blue = subject, green = verb)

in which atoms are actively broken apart (Dependent clause)

rather a kind of nuclear battery

that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power. (dependent clause)

"rather a kind of nuclear battery" is not a clause because it does not have any verb. Together, this phrase and the last clause build a dependent clause that appears after the semicolon. This is the incorrect sentence structure.

Also note that for every clause, IC or DC, the SV pairs must be independent. The verb of one clause cannot play the role of verb for the subject of another clause.

devinawilliam83 wrote:
Thanks, would the following construction be right?
The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; it is a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.?

also, isnt nuclear battery a noun and uses a verb for the sentence post the semi colon in the original question to qualify as a clause

just trying to get my concept clear

The sentence that you have cited is correct. "it" in the beginning of the second IC correctly refers to "The energy source on voyager 2" because they both are placed in the subject position of the ICs. This is from the grammatical standpoint. Logically also "it" refers to the same because the second IC is talking about "nuclear battery" which is a kind of "energy source" only.

Hope this helps.

_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 193
Location: India
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V40
WE: Operations (Insurance)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 291 [0], given: 11

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jan 2012, 23:35
Thanks, would the following construction be right?
The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; it is a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.?

also, isnt nuclear battery a noun and uses a verb for the sentence post the semi colon in the original question to qualify as a clause

just trying to get my concept clear
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Apr 2011
Posts: 289
Schools: Booth,NUS,St.Gallon
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 282 [0], given: 51

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2012, 08:24
The sentence requires the use of a conjunction which brings in contrast .Hence the use of but is a must here.I think an independent clause cannot begin with rather although there might be an independent subject and verb etc.The use of rather itself brings in a sense of dependency .
_________________

+1 if you like my explanation .Thanks

Manager
Joined: 16 Sep 2010
Posts: 223
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Real Estate
GMAT 1: 740 Q48 V42
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 2

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2012, 16:16
devinawilliam83 wrote:
Thanks, would the following construction be right?
The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; it is a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.?

also, isnt nuclear battery a noun and uses a verb for the sentence post the semi colon in the original question to qualify as a clause

just trying to get my concept clear

It appears correct to me. The only thing that could be questionable (for the record I think it is correct) is the pronoun reference to it. Logically "it" refers to the energy source on Voyager 2 so I think you are good to go. Someone correct me if they believe otherwise.
Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2010
Posts: 384
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 169 [0], given: 87

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2012, 19:57
Isn't 'but rather' repetitive in the option B?
Intern
Joined: 06 Apr 2011
Posts: 18
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 4

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2012, 02:20
Hi u0422811 i dont think so "It" is correct, beacuse It can refer to nuclear reactor also
Director
Status: Enjoying the GMAT journey....
Joined: 26 Aug 2011
Posts: 735
Location: India
GMAT 1: 620 Q49 V24
Followers: 72

Kudos [?]: 504 [0], given: 264

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2012, 10:24
not an independent clause...
+1 B
_________________

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.

A WAY TO INCREASE FROM QUANT 35-40 TO 47 : http://gmatclub.com/forum/a-way-to-increase-from-q35-40-to-q-138750.html

Q 47/48 To Q 50 + http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-final-climb-quest-for-q-50-from-q47-129441.html#p1064367

Three good RC strategies http://gmatclub.com/forum/three-different-strategies-for-attacking-rc-127287.html

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 410
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 272 [0], given: 34

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jul 2012, 14:16
bsaikrishna wrote:
Isn't 'but rather' repetitive in the option B?
Can someone answer above point? This question brought me here in the forum. I ,in fact, striked this option being an convoluted repetitive option, when going through the options in the first run. Though, I got this question correct by selecting this choice in the second pass because I scratched all the choices, still want to know the best answer for this construction.

I know that "but rather" is OA, but wouldn't "but" only would be sufficient :
Shouldn't
(B) apart, but
or even
(B) apart, rather
work?
_________________

If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that!
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.
Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/1000-sc-notes-at-one-place-in-one-document-with-best-of-explanations-192961.html

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip.

Manager
Joined: 24 Sep 2008
Posts: 191
Schools: MIT / INSEAD / IIM - ABC
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 7

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jul 2012, 01:27
devinawilliam83 wrote:
The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; rather a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.

(A) apart; rather
(B) apart, but rather
(C) apart, but rather that of
(D) apart, but that of
(E) apart; it is that of

isnt "a kind of nuclear battery ..." a clause? if yes, why cant i connect the 2 clauses with a semi colon using rather?Please explain

Usage of "not X...but rather Y..."

A: semi-colon can't be used so eliminated
B. Should be it..
C. Introduces parallelism err "that of"
D. Parallelism & idiom errs
E. "that of" parallelism err
Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Posts: 464
Concentration: Marketing, Finance
GMAT 1: Q V0
GPA: 3.23
Followers: 25

Kudos [?]: 433 [0], given: 11

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Feb 2013, 05:28
[quote="devinawilliam83"]The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; rather a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.

(A) apart; rather
(B) apart, but rather
(C) apart, but rather that of
(D) apart, but that of
(E) apart; it is that of

CORRECT CONSTRUCTION: The energy source on V2 is not X, but rather Y that uses natural radioactive decay...

The correct construction should be NOT [NOUN] BUT [NOUN]... "That of" is not necessary and is in fact wrong. Thus, (C), (D) and (E) are eliminated.

Semicolon (;) is used to precede an independent clause. "rather a kind of X that uses Y.." is not an independent clause. Thus (A) is wrong

_________________

Impossible is nothing to God.

Director
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 608
Location: Germany
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 580 Q46 V24
GPA: 3.88
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 266 [0], given: 200

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jan 2015, 05:31
egmat wrote:
devinawilliam83 wrote:
The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; rather a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.

(A) apart; rather
(B) apart, but rather
(C) apart, but rather that of
(D) apart, but that of
(E) apart; it is that of

isnt "a kind of nuclear battery ..." a clause? if yes, why cant i connect the 2 clauses with a semi colon using rather?Please explain

Hi,

The prerequisite for any clause is that it must have a subject and it must have a verb. Presence of SV pair makes a clause, either a dependent or an independent.

This sentence can be divided into following clauses:

The energy source on Voyager 2
is not a nuclear reactor (Independent Clause) (blue = subject, green = verb)

in which atoms are actively broken apart (Dependent clause)

rather a kind of nuclear battery

that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power. (dependent clause)

"rather a kind of nuclear battery" is not a clause because it does not have any verb. Together, this phrase and the last clause build a dependent clause that appears after the semicolon. This is the incorrect sentence structure.

Also note that for every clause, IC or DC, the SV pairs must be independent. The verb of one clause cannot play the role of verb for the subject of another clause.

devinawilliam83 wrote:
Thanks, would the following construction be right?
The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; it is a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.?

also, isnt nuclear battery a noun and uses a verb for the sentence post the semi colon in the original question to qualify as a clause

just trying to get my concept clear

The sentence that you have cited is correct. "it" in the beginning of the second IC correctly refers to "The energy source on voyager 2" because they both are placed in the subject position of the ICs. This is from the grammatical standpoint. Logically also "it" refers to the same because the second IC is talking about "nuclear battery" which is a kind of "energy source" only.

Hope this helps.

I am having problems with the choice B: when we use and, or, but with a comma preceding them (exept x,y and Z) , don't we need a verb after BUT RATHER ? BUT RATHER IS A KIND OF .... noun phrase + THAT (subordinator) is just a fragment. Or when we use BUT with RATHER they must convey some other rules ?

I like to eat, AND I train all day
I like apples and peaches
James and John are .....
_________________

When you’re up, your friends know who you are. When you’re down, you know who your friends are.

800Score ONLY QUANT CAT1 51, CAT2 50, CAT3 50
GMAT PREP 670
MGMAT CAT 630
KAPLAN CAT 660

Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Sep 2011
Posts: 365
Location: United States
WE: Corporate Finance (Manufacturing)
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 299 [0], given: 45

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jan 2015, 10:03
BrainLab wrote:
egmat wrote:
devinawilliam83 wrote:
The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; rather a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.

(A) apart; rather
(B) apart, but rather
(C) apart, but rather that of
(D) apart, but that of
(E) apart; it is that of

isnt "a kind of nuclear battery ..." a clause? if yes, why cant i connect the 2 clauses with a semi colon using rather?Please explain

Hi,

The prerequisite for any clause is that it must have a subject and it must have a verb. Presence of SV pair makes a clause, either a dependent or an independent.

This sentence can be divided into following clauses:

The energy source on Voyager 2
is not a nuclear reactor (Independent Clause) (blue = subject, green = verb)

in which atoms are actively broken apart (Dependent clause)

rather a kind of nuclear battery

that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power. (dependent clause)

"rather a kind of nuclear battery" is not a clause because it does not have any verb. Together, this phrase and the last clause build a dependent clause that appears after the semicolon. This is the incorrect sentence structure.

Also note that for every clause, IC or DC, the SV pairs must be independent. The verb of one clause cannot play the role of verb for the subject of another clause.

devinawilliam83 wrote:
Thanks, would the following construction be right?
The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; it is a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.?

also, isnt nuclear battery a noun and uses a verb for the sentence post the semi colon in the original question to qualify as a clause

just trying to get my concept clear

The sentence that you have cited is correct. "it" in the beginning of the second IC correctly refers to "The energy source on voyager 2" because they both are placed in the subject position of the ICs. This is from the grammatical standpoint. Logically also "it" refers to the same because the second IC is talking about "nuclear battery" which is a kind of "energy source" only.

Hope this helps.

I am having problems with the choice B: when we use and, or, but with a comma preceding them (exept x,y and Z) , don't we need a verb after BUT RATHER ? BUT RATHER IS A KIND OF .... noun phrase + THAT (subordinator) is just a fragment. Or when we use BUT with RATHER they must convey some other rules ?

I like to eat, AND I train all day
I like apples and peaches
James and John are .....

Hi,
I believe your focus is too narrow. First off, most other answer choices have something glaringly incorrect in them. "Kind of" or "that of" have illogical referents (because the predicate is noun itself, without any belonging to or quality of the other nouns). Secondly, "but rather" still follows the idiom "not x but y" even though you could toss it out if there were a more concise answer like "apart, but". Though, there isn't. Finally, not all conjunctions bring together two independent clauses. Some of them do in fact bridge together lists, clauses, and even predicates (as it does in this case). I believe the wording got you pigeonholed, all the while you needed to adjust your analysis on its meaning. Nevertheless, thanks for posting. Hope this helps!
Manager
Status: The best is yet to come.....
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 78
GMAT 1: 610 Q47 V27
GRE 1: 304 Q156 V148
GPA: 3.66
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 91

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Oct 2015, 06:27
egmat wrote:
devinawilliam83 wrote:
The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; rather a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.

(A) apart; rather
(B) apart, but rather
(C) apart, but rather that of
(D) apart, but that of
(E) apart; it is that of

isnt "a kind of nuclear battery ..." a clause? if yes, why cant i connect the 2 clauses with a semi colon using rather?Please explain

Hi,

The prerequisite for any clause is that it must have a subject and it must have a verb. Presence of SV pair makes a clause, either a dependent or an independent.

This sentence can be divided into following clauses:

The energy source on Voyager 2
is not a nuclear reactor (Independent Clause) (blue = subject, green = verb)

in which atoms are actively broken apart (Dependent clause)

rather a kind of nuclear battery

that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power. (dependent clause)

"rather a kind of nuclear battery" is not a clause because it does not have any verb. Together, this phrase and the last clause build a dependent clause that appears after the semicolon. This is the incorrect sentence structure.

Also note that for every clause, IC or DC, the SV pairs must be independent. The verb of one clause cannot play the role of verb for the subject of another clause.

devinawilliam83 wrote:
Thanks, would the following construction be right?
The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; it is a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.?

also, isnt nuclear battery a noun and uses a verb for the sentence post the semi colon in the original question to qualify as a clause

just trying to get my concept clear

The sentence that you have cited is correct. "it" in the beginning of the second IC correctly refers to "The energy source on voyager 2" because they both are placed in the subject position of the ICs. This is from the grammatical standpoint. Logically also "it" refers to the same because the second IC is talking about "nuclear battery" which is a kind of "energy source" only.

Hope this helps.

Can 'comma + FANBOYS' join an IC and DC?
The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor (Independent Clause), but rather a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.(dependent clause).

Which one of the following is correct?

Not X, but rather Y OR Not X but rather Y
_________________

Getting kudos is encouraging.
Giving kudos is a way of saying thanks
.

Hasan Mahmud

Intern
Joined: 06 Nov 2012
Posts: 1
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Apr 2016, 08:51
Hello E-gmat,
I have reviewed the course explanation to this question as well as the replies related to this post. I am confused in answer choice E and I found myself running into the same issues with similar structures. Would you help clarify my thoughts. Here is my analysis.

The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; rather a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.

(A) apart; rather
(B) apart, but rather
(C) apart, but rather that of
(D) apart, but that of
(E) apart; it is that of

The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor,
in which atoms are actively broken apart; rather a kind of nuclear battery

that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.

two clauses: 1 IC and 1 DC fine, sv pair agree with each clause fine, Error in the sentence is that ; is used to join to IC and after the ; there is not an ID, get it. I understand the Idiom A is not X but rather Y. I understand the commas encoding the modifier , in which atoms are actively broker apart, rather a .... is a modifier and is not part of but clause therefore, making a"IC". All good. But why E is not correct since I have ; and a IC follows.
1. is it ONLY because the contrast is not stated correctly here. Therefore, losing the meaning of the sentence ?
2. Or the lost in the contrast meaning AND the THAT OF words makes this question also incorrect. If so, why ?

I thought , as you mentioned on your explanations. It logically and structurally refers to Energy source and by saying THAT OF is correctly refers to the other energy source which means the Energy source of the nuclear battery which is what the sentence wants to convey a kind of energy source that is used in natural radioactive. so It is that energy source.. that of a kind of nuclear batter..
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1996
Followers: 2082

Kudos [?]: 7158 [0], given: 267

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2016, 08:10
Hi Aris,

Thanks for posting your doubt here.

Choice E is incorrect because there is no grammatical or logical antecedent for the pronoun phrase that of. Please note that that the subject pronoun it in the second independent clause in this choice already stands for The energy source on Voyager 2. It is enough to say:

The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor; it is a kind of nuclear battery.

There is absolutely no need for the pronoun phrase that of in Choice E. This is the reason why this choice is incorrect.

Hope this helps.
Thanks.
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Math Forum Moderator
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 940
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Followers: 39

Kudos [?]: 383 [0], given: 58

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jan 2017, 11:35
The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in which atoms are actively broken apart; rather a kind of nuclear battery that uses natural radioactive decay to produce power.

(A) apart; rather - incorrectly uses a semicolon rather than a coordinating conjunction (but) to connect the coordinate parts
(B) apart, but rather - Not x , but rather Y
(C) apart, but rather that of - that of pronoun issue - has no referent
(D) apart, but that of - that of pronoun issue - has no referent
(E) apart; it is that of - that of pronoun issue - has no referent

_________________

When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful

Re: The energy source on Voyager 2 is not a nuclear reactor, in   [#permalink] 03 Jan 2017, 11:35
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
5 As sources of electrical power, windmills now account for only about 2 7 03 Jun 2015, 05:34
2 Even though energy drinks have gained popularity in the 16-2 3 24 Aug 2014, 23:13
2 Nearly two tons of nuclear-reactor fuel have already been 6 10 Sep 2012, 09:35
28 Nearly two tons of nuclear-reactor fuel have already been 14 28 Oct 2010, 20:33
25 The energy source on Voyager2 is not a nuclear reactor, in 23 18 Jun 2007, 07:39
Display posts from previous: Sort by