medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning

Although the proposed dam would generate electricity without emitting carbon, its reservoir would permanently submerge thousands of acres of old-growth forest whose carbon storage and biodiversity cannot be replaced. Weighing what would be gained against what would be lost, the project would, on a full environmental accounting, do more ecological harm than good.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?

  1. On a full environmental accounting, the proposed project would do more ecological harm than good.
  2. The carbon storage and biodiversity of the submerged forest cannot be replaced.
  3. Carbon-free electricity generation should always take priority over the preservation of habitat.
  4. The proposed dam would generate electricity without emitting carbon.
  5. The dam's reservoir would in fact permanently submerge thousands of acres of old-growth forest.

Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →

More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice

KomFi Academy — Stop doomscrolling. Get KomFi.

Build your intelligence, anytime, anywhere.

KomFi Academy is a curated training platform with 64,000+ practice questions, 24,000+ flashcards, on-demand video lectures, podcasts, and 4K slide decks across the topics serious professionals study: GMAT, LSAT, MCAT, Investment Banking, Private Equity (LBOs & PE math), Private Credit, Quantitative Finance, Financial Accounting, Asset- Backed Securities, Volume Profile Analysis, Order Flow Trading, Market Microstructure, Volume Spread Analysis, Elliott Wave Theory, Volume-Price Analysis, and Public Offering Frameworks.

What's inside

Topics

View pricing · Read testimonials