📢 Too many exams? Don’t know which one suits you best? Book Your Free Expert 👉 call Now!
  • google app store apple app store
    • ✖

      Question

      In the question below, a passage is given followed by

      three statements. You must determine which combination of the statements WEAKENS the argument presented. Argument: To solve global food insecurity, several biotech firms are proposing the mass-scale development of "Vertical Urban Farming." They argue that growing crops in climate-controlled skyscrapers within cities will eliminate the need for vast agricultural land, reduce water consumption by 95%, and ensure a year-round supply of fresh produce regardless of climate change. However, critics point out the high energy costs for artificial lighting, the limited variety of crops that can be grown profitably, and the potential for these systems to become exclusive high-end services for the wealthy. Which of the following statements, if true, would WEAKEN the case for Vertical Urban Farming? I. New breakthroughs in "Regenerative Open-Field Agriculture" have demonstrated the ability to restore soil health and produce high yields with minimal chemical input and water use. II. Current urban zoning laws and international food safety protocols vary so widely that a standardized, global rollout of vertical farms would face decades of legal delays. III. Analysts have found that the carbon footprint of the electricity required for vertical farm lighting often exceeds the emissions saved by reducing food transportation distances.
      A Only I and II Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
      B Only II and III Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
      C Only I and III Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
      D Only I Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
      E All I, II, and III Correct Answer Incorrect Answer

      Solution

      The Argument: Vertical farming is the solution to food insecurity because it saves land and water and provides a stable supply. Statement I (Weakens): This mirrors your "recycling is sufficient" logic. If traditional open-field farming can be improved to be sustainable and high-yielding, the "necessity" of a complex, expensive vertical alternative is diminished. Statement II (Weakens): This mirrors your "space treaty/geopolitical disputes" logic. It highlights significant legal and regulatory hurdles that make the mass-scale implementation of the solution impractical or unlikely to succeed in the near future. Statement III (Weakens): This mirrors your "terrestrial mining is becoming efficient" logic. It attacks the core environmental benefit of the proposal by showing that the solution (vertical farming) may actually create a new, larger problem (high electricity emissions) that outweighs its primary benefit.

      Practice Next
      More Strong and Weak Argument Questions

      Relevant for Exams:

      ask-question