Norway is one of the largest producers of wind energy and has been manufacturing turbines for the last 20 years. The average life of a wind turbine when deployed along coastal Norway is 20 years. However, the same wind turbines when exported to Netherlands, where the average wind speed is 20% higher, break down in 10 years. Thus, the reduced life span of wind turbines in Netherlands is due to higher wind speeds.
CONCLUSION: Higher Wind (cause) --> Reduced life span of turbine (effect)Which of the following provides the most support to the author’s conclusion?
We are looking for an answer that supports the conclusion we identified.
A. In spite of higher wind speed, the weight of the turbine used in Netherlands is same as that of the one used in Norway.
Incorrect. If weights are the same, we still do not see reason for why the reduced life span. If anything, this weakens as the turbine should be working just fine if nothing changes in it's weight.B. Turbines that are manufactured in Germany and deployed in Netherlands last as long in Netherlands as they do in Germany.
Incorrect. Again, no reason why the same cannot be case for Norway turbines. Weakener.C. There are some low-lying areas in Netherlands that get much lower wind speeds.
Incorrect. Weakens the argument. Says that some areas the speed is less so hopefully the life span would be more. D. The corrosion resistant coating applied on these turbines is one of the most advanced coatings used in an industrial
Incorrect. Irrelevant. Out of scope. Also, if anything weakens as it gives a reason for the turbines to perform at the same level.E. GE Research operated a wind turbine in a simulated wind tunnel and proved that operating the wind turbine at 2x the rated wind speed decreases the life of wind turbine.
Correct. Gives conclusive evidence through an example.