Hello. This question is incomplete. The full question is:
"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?
(A) The cost of oil has fallen dramatically. (B) The reduction in the cost of solar-power equipment has occurred despite increased raw material costs for that equipment. (C) Technological changes have increased the efficiency of oil-fired power plants. (D) Most electricity is generated by coal-fired or nuclear, rather than oil-fired, power plants. (E) When the price of oil increases, reserves of oil not previously worth exploiting become economically viable."
Answer:
(C) Technological changes have increased the efficiency of oil-fired power plants.
Explanation:
Economic viability is able to reveal the degree of acceptance of consumers in relation to a specific product. This viability is important to understand how the product will be received in the market and how profitable or not it can be for those who produce it.
Economic viability is usually greater when the cost and benefit ratio of the product or service is favorable, however this is not always the case.
Regarding the use of solar energy, although technological changes have made the installation and equipment of this type of energy more cost-effective, these technological changes have also increased the efficiency of oil plants. As a result, the economic viability of solar energy has declined.
This question has no answer, as it explains the DEVELOPMENTS IN MEDICINE IN WESTERN SOCIETY OVER THE PAST THREE CENTURIES or safe to say this isn't exactly a question, rather it is a list of statements Sociologists are likely to develop in reference to the development of medicine in the western culture.
For instance, Sociologist is a scientist that studies the subject SOCIOLOGY which in turn is the study of society, human social interaction and the rules and processes that bind and separate people not only as individuals, but as members of associations, groups and institutions.
With this definition of Sociologist and Sociology, we can deduce that the listed statement;
(a. a trend toward seeing the origins and treatments of disease as physical and explicable in scientific terms
b. the acceptance of the hospital as the setting within which to treat serious illnesses
c. the development of the medical profession as a body with codes of ethics and significant social power
d. the requirement that medical training be systematic and long term) are likely what Sociologist will include in the development of medicine.
Answer:
dementia
Explanation:
Dementia: In abnormal psychology, the term "dementia" is described as an overall term associated with specific diseases and related conditions that are being distinguished as a decline in an individual's memory, thinking skills, language, and problems solving tendency that affects his or her capability of performing day-to-day activities.
Example: Memory loss.
Cause: Alzheimer disease.
In the question above, the given statement represents dementia.
Answer: Caste system
Explanation:
They didn't introduce it to them. Someone else did.
