QUESTION TYPE: Identify the Conclusion
CONCLUSION: The country is likely to quickly grow a hydrogen fuel infrastructure.
REASONING: 100 years ago, the country quickly developed an infrastructure of fuel distribution for gas powered vehicles. (In response to demand)
ANALYSIS: “However” is a conclusion indicator. It indicates the author’s opinion. Note that you should figure out what “this infrastructure” refers to before looking at the answers. (It refers to a hydrogen fuel infrastructure).
This isn’t a good argument, by the way. It’s making two assumptions:
- There will be consumer demand for hydrogen vehicles.
- A network of hydrogen fuel distribution wouldn’t be significantly different from a gas network. (e.g. technically impossible, too expensive, etc.)
However, it’s not a flaw type question, so you don’t need to notice these flaws to solve the question.
- This is a fact that provides context. The conclusion is that we can quickly grow a fuel network for these cars.
- This is a fact that provides context. If we already had a fuel network, there would be no point to this argument!
- This goes too far. The author is only making a limited comparison between two types of fuel-distribution networks. They might not believe that every technology would quickly get an infrastructure.
- CORRECT. This follows the word “however”, which is a conclusion indicator.
- The author actually forgot to mention consumer demand for hydrogen. This answer is an unstated assumption made by the author; it’s not the conclusion!
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly