The passage:
Here is the link to the passage in case you found the above images difficult to read.
I got a few questions wrong and I wanted to understand why:
Question 1:
I chose (E) because I interpreted the “extravagant claims” as “the principle of energy conservation not being follow”. The author says in lines 32-35: “Now, if under certain conditions a heat pump puts out more thermal energy than it consumes in electrical energy, has the law of energy conservation been challenged? No, not even remotely”. Since the author disproves the “claim” that the principle of energy conservation is not being followed, I chose (E). But the correct answer is ©. Isn’t the main idea of a passage usually the hammer?
Question 2 :
I chose C because the author says in lines 56-59: “Here, then, lies a genuine drawback of heat pumps: in extremely cold climates-where the most heat is needed-heat pumps are least able to supply enough heat.” If we can control the heat output, then heat pumps would be useful in cold climates as well because we could increase the heat output but the correct answer is (E). Could someone explain why (C ) is wrong?
Question 3:
Why is the answer (A)? The last line doesn’t really seem as if the author is regretting anything.
Thanks in advance for your help! 
Yeah I am halfway through this video right now 
The author certainly does say that heat pumps do not challenge the law of conservation of energy, but that’s just 1 paragraph. Rest 3-4 paragraphs are based on the author describing how heat pumps work, their use and finally the whole inefficient functioning in cold.
You need to look for the primary purpose and not small parts of the paragraph.
There is no evidence of heat pumps not having a thermostat. Also, your argument that "If we can control the heat output, then heat pumps would be useful in cold climates as well because we could increase the heat output " is just outside knowledge.
The reason as mentioned by the author for heat pumps not being widely used is in lines 1-6: “The use of heat pumps has been held back…energy conservation.” So it infers that people think “the sellers are making a false claim about heat pump efficiency and the law of conservation of energy is violated by their claims hence it’s a sham”. However, in lines 33-38 we clearly see the author telling us why the whole violation of conservation of energy argument doesn’t stand. He states that the law isn’t violated because the evaporator accounts for the difference, people have been missing out on.
Hence, if people “gave more credit” or took into account the energy consumed by the evaporator, the people wouldn’t have been misguided into believing that the heat pump violates the law of conservation of energy. Thus the answer is (E).
The author starts the paragraph with the word “unfortunately” and goes ahead to state the reason for this misfortune. That is your evidence to see that the author thinks “only if the heat pumps worked in cold too”. Also, you can go about it with the elimination technique.
Any evidence for “premature defeatism” or (B)? Nah.
Any evidence for “Welcome challenge” or (C)? Nah.
Any evidence for “Sloppy thinking” or (D)? Nah.
Any evidence for “educational campaign” or (E)? Nah.
Thus (A) is your answer.
Really sorry for such a long reply. I would love to clarify anything you want. Hope this helps :))
1 Like
This is amazing! Thank you so much for your explanation!
