Statements: Wind is an inexhaustible source of energy and an aerogenerator can…
2025
Statements: Wind is an inexhaustible source of energy and an aerogenerator can convert it into electricity. Though not much has been done in this field, the survey shows that there is vast potential for developing wind as alternative source of energy.
Conclusions:
I. Energy by wind is comparatively newly emerging field.
II. The energy crisis can be dealt by exploring more in the field of aero-generation.
- A.
Only conclusion I follows
- B.
Only conclusion II follows
- C.
Either I or II follows
- D.
Both I and II follow
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: D
Concept
In statement-conclusion reasoning, a conclusion “follows” only when it is a definite inference drawn strictly from what the statement says, without bringing in any outside assumption or general knowledge. Each conclusion is checked independently against the statement, so more than one conclusion can follow at the same time if each is separately supported.
Application
Conclusion I says wind energy is a comparatively newly emerging field. The statement itself says “not much has been done in this field,” which is a direct statement that the field is still at an early stage — so this conclusion is directly supported.
Conclusion II says the energy crisis can be dealt with by exploring more in aero-generation. The statement itself says there is “vast potential for developing wind as alternative source of energy” — exploring an alternative energy source with vast potential is exactly what addressing an energy crisis means, so this conclusion is also directly supported.
Cross-check
Restricting the answer to only the newly-emerging-field point ignores the separate “vast potential” clause, which independently supports the energy-crisis conclusion — so limiting the answer to one conclusion under-counts the support in the statement.
Restricting the answer to only the energy-crisis point ignores the separate “not much has been done” clause, which independently supports the newly-emerging-field conclusion — so this too under-counts the support in the statement.
Reading the two conclusions as alternatives (only one of them holding) applies when two conclusions are mutually exclusive. Here one conclusion is about the field's stage of development and the other is about using the field to meet energy needs — two different aspects of the same statement, not mutually exclusive — so an either-or reading misreads the pair.
Since both conclusions are independently and directly supported by distinct parts of the statement, both conclusions hold.