Environmental policy specialists frequently presuppose that the public will endorse regulatory measures for environmental protection when such policie...
GMAT Information and Ideas : (Ideas) Questions
Environmental policy specialists frequently presuppose that the public will endorse regulatory measures for environmental protection when such policies clearly improve public health outcomes and ecological conditions. Research conducted by policy analysts Janet Williams, Michael Torres, and Lisa Chang examined this presupposition via surveys regarding clean energy programs, finding that although respondents decisively judged solar and wind technologies as environmentally advantageous and more sustainable long-term compared to fossil fuel options, 91.2 percent of survey participants indicated stronger support for government funding of fossil fuel infrastructure over clean energy development. These findings suggest that ______
Which choice most logically completes the text?
the public probably exaggerates the ecological harm from clean energy projects and thus accurately concludes that traditional energy sources will produce fewer environmental consequences than solar and wind programs will.
the public probably views clean energy projects as economically destabilizing and consequently mistakenly believes that endorsing such programs will damage their economic well-being more than traditional energy investments would.
traditional energy projects are probably regarded more positively by the public because the proven track record of these technologies provides enhanced trust in their dependability compared to clean energy options.
clean energy programs are probably less attractive to the public than traditional energy projects due to the understanding that clean technologies demand excessive governmental involvement to execute.
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| Environmental policy specialists frequently presuppose that the public will endorse regulatory measures for environmental protection when such policies clearly improve public health outcomes and ecological conditions. |
|
| Research conducted by policy analysts Janet Williams, Michael Torres, and Lisa Chang examined this presupposition via surveys regarding clean energy programs. |
|
| finding that although respondents decisively judged solar and wind technologies as environmentally advantageous and more sustainable long-term compared to fossil fuel options. |
|
| 91.2 percent of survey participants indicated stronger support for government funding of fossil fuel infrastructure over clean energy development. |
|
Passage Architecture and Core Elements
Main Point: Research reveals a contradiction between what people think about clean energy's environmental benefits versus what energy projects they actually support funding.
Argument Flow: The passage starts with policy specialists' assumption that clear environmental benefits lead to public support. However, research testing this assumption found a striking contradiction: while people acknowledged that solar and wind are environmentally superior to fossil fuels, the vast majority still preferred government funding go toward fossil fuel infrastructure.
Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely
What's being asked? We need to complete the sentence about what the research findings suggest - specifically, what explains the contradiction between people's environmental views and their funding preferences.
What type of answer do we need? A logical inference that explains why people would recognize clean energy's environmental benefits but still prefer funding fossil fuels.
Any limiting keywords? None specified.
Step 3: Prethink the Answer
- The correct answer needs to explain this specific contradiction: people understand that clean energy is environmentally better, yet they overwhelmingly support funding the environmentally worse option
- This suggests there must be some other factor beyond environmental considerations that's driving their funding preferences
- The most logical explanation would be that people have concerns about clean energy that outweigh the environmental benefits they acknowledge
the public probably exaggerates the ecological harm from clean energy projects and thus accurately concludes that traditional energy sources will produce fewer environmental consequences than solar and wind programs will.
- Claims people exaggerate ecological harm from clean energy and think fossil fuels cause fewer environmental problems
- This directly contradicts the passage, which clearly states people decisively judged solar and wind technologies as environmentally advantageous compared to fossil fuels
the public probably views clean energy projects as economically destabilizing and consequently mistakenly believes that endorsing such programs will damage their economic well-being more than traditional energy investments would.
- Suggests people view clean energy as economically destabilizing and fear it would harm their economic well-being more than traditional energy investments
- This perfectly explains the contradiction: people recognize environmental benefits but prioritize economic concerns when it comes to funding decisions
traditional energy projects are probably regarded more positively by the public because the proven track record of these technologies provides enhanced trust in their dependability compared to clean energy options.
- Claims traditional energy is preferred due to proven track record providing enhanced trust in dependability
- While this could explain some preference, it doesn't address the specific contradiction between environmental recognition and funding choices
clean energy programs are probably less attractive to the public than traditional energy projects due to the understanding that clean technologies demand excessive governmental involvement to execute.
- Suggests clean energy is less attractive due to excessive governmental involvement
- This doesn't make logical sense since both clean energy and fossil fuel funding involve government involvement according to the survey