Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: People think electric cars will save the planet, but the electricity they use has to be made somehow, and all the current ways we make electricity also hurt the environment.

Conclusion: Electric cars may not actually solve the problem of environmental degradation as much as their supporters claim.

Reasoning: Charging electric car batteries requires power from sources like hydroelectric, nuclear, or coal that each cause significant environmental harm.

Analysis: The argument sets up a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' scenario regarding energy production. Since the goal of electric cars is to stop environmental damage, but the power they need causes environmental damage, the conclusion should reflect this irony or limitation. Look for an answer that suggests the environmental benefits of electric cars are offset or undermined by the pollution created during electricity generation. We are looking for a completion that highlights this trade-off.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

8.

Which one of the following most logically completes the argument?

Correct Answer
A
It cautiously concludes that the environmental consequences will be worse than proponents believe, which follows from the noted considerable harms from electricity generation without asserting an absolute net increase or no net reduction.
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep