The initial causes of serious accidents at nuclear power : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 23 Jan 2017, 08:58

### 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 initial causes of serious accidents at nuclear power

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 647
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 290 [0], given: 0

The initial causes of serious accidents at nuclear power [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Dec 2007, 10:43
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (01:02) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The initial causes of serious accidents at nuclear power plants have not so far been flaws in the advanced-technology portion of the plants. Rather, the initial causes have been attributed to human error, as when a worker at the Browns Mills reactor in the United States dropped a candle and started a fire, or to flaws in the plumbing, exemplified in a recent incident in Japan. Such everyday events cannot be thought unlikely to occur over the long run.

Which of the following is most strongly supported by the statements above?

(A) Now that nuclear power generation has become a part of everyday life, an ever-increasing yearly incidence of serious accidents at plants can be expected.
(B) If nuclear power plants continue in operation, a serious accident at such a plant is not improbable.
(C) The likelihood of human error at the operating consoles of nuclear power generators cannot be lessened by thoughtful design of dials, switches, and displays.
(D) The design of nuclear power plants attempts to compensate for possible failures of the materials used in their construction.
(E) No serious accident will be caused in the future by some flaw in the advanced-technology portion of a nuclear power plant.

If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Joined: 01 Oct 2007
Posts: 87
Followers: 0

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

Re: CR: Nuclear power plant [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Dec 2007, 12:09
eyunni wrote:
The initial causes of serious accidents at nuclear power plants have not so far been flaws in the advanced-technology portion of the plants. Rather, the initial causes have been attributed to human error, as when a worker at the Browns Mills reactor in the United States dropped a candle and started a fire, or to flaws in the plumbing, exemplified in a recent incident in Japan. Such everyday events cannot be thought unlikely to occur over the long run.

Which of the following is most strongly supported by the statements above?

(A) Now that nuclear power generation has become a part of everyday life, an ever-increasing yearly incidence of serious accidents at plants can be expected.
(B) If nuclear power plants continue in operation, a serious accident at such a plant is not improbable.
(C) The likelihood of human error at the operating consoles of nuclear power generators cannot be lessened by thoughtful design of dials, switches, and displays.
(D) The design of nuclear power plants attempts to compensate for possible failures of the materials used in their construction.
(E) No serious accident will be caused in the future by some flaw in the advanced-technology portion of a nuclear power plant.

B. B should look promising, given its weak wording--inference questions like this one generally favor answer choices with qualifications such as not improbable. Conversely, I'd avoid C and E because of their categorical cannot and no.

Then, looking back at the passage, you can see that the main point is that nuclear power plant accidents have so far been caused by human error. The last sentence tells us that human errors of this sort are likely to occur in the future (cannot be thought unlikely = are likely). So an accident caused by human error is likely to happen in the future. That's what B says.

A might seem tempting--but the bit about becoming increasingly common isn't supported by the passage.
Re: CR: Nuclear power plant   [#permalink] 07 Dec 2007, 12:09
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 Responding to criticism that the new nuclear power plant was potential 2 24 Aug 2016, 00:23
6 X: When a rare but serious industrial accident occurs, 28 25 Aug 2009, 07:00
1 The Kuwaiti oil-well fires, unlike the nuclear accident at 9 17 Aug 2009, 02:27
1 CR-Nuclear Power in France 4 19 Feb 2009, 07:07
X: When a rare but serious industrial accident occurs, 8 26 Jan 2008, 09:20
Display posts from previous: Sort by