Technological improvements and reduced equipment costs have made converting solar energy directly into electricity far more cost-efficient in the last decade. However, the threshold of economic viability for solar power (that is, the price per barrel to which oil would have to rise in order for new solar power plants to be more economical than new oil-fired power plants) is unchanged at thirty-five dollars.
Which of the following, if true, does most to help explain why the increased cost-efficiency of solar power has not decreased its threshold of economic viability?
The cost of oil has fallen dramatically.
The reduction in the cost of solar-power equipment has occurred despite increased raw material costs for that equipment.
Technological changes have increased the efficiency of oil-fired power plants.
Most electricity is generated by coal-fired or nuclear, rather than oil-fired, power plants.
When the price of oil increases, reserves of oil not previously worth exploiting become economically viable.
情景:技术进步和减少的设备成本让太阳能转换电能变得更有效率。但是,经济可行性阈值却完全没有变化。
推理:直接解释however身后的部分即可。
本题其实比较重要的问题是把什么叫经济可行性阈值看懂。阈值本身虽然是一种价格差,但是其本质是成本效益的比较。题目中所给出的经济可行性的阈值表示:“如果令某种方式在经济效益上超过火电,那么火电每桶油需要上升多少钱”。
选项分析:
A选项:油价下降了很多。在推理文段中,其实油价是一个量度的标准,真正比较的是经济效益。
B选项:尽管将太阳能转化为电能的器材原料价格变高,但是这种器材的成本还是下降了。本选项在解释前提中“减少的设备成本”。
C选项:Correct. 技术的革新增加了火电的经济效益。本选项直接谈及经济效益,可以有效的解释现象。
D选项:大部分的电力是来自于煤电和核电而不是火电的。本选项和待解释的现象无关。
E选项:当油价上涨的时候,有些以前不值得开发的储油地也开始变得值得开发了。本选项和待解释的现象无关。
题目的关键在“经济可行性阈值”这个概念,一个背景知识是:国家或者地区为了发展清洁能源,燃油发电的阈值需要提高,因为由于历史原因,目前燃油发电的成本依然是偏低的。
就这道题来说,我们假设发每单位的电,太阳能发电成本为100元,燃油发电实际成本需要65元,但国家为了发展太阳能,使它更具经济型,所以会使燃油发电成本提升超过太阳能发电,这里近似提升35元,那么这个提升的35元,就叫做“经济可行性阈值”。
如果太阳能发电成本降低,比如每单位电降低到90元,如果燃油发电成本不变,那么“经济可行性阈值”是要降低的(25元)
但是如果如C选项所说,燃油电厂的效率也提升了(成本降低),比如降低至每单位电55元,那么这时,经济可行性阈值是不变的,依然是35元,所以C选项正确。
谢谢你
谢谢!
赞,谢谢
感谢啊!
感谢感谢,要不是你我真的没看懂
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论