There are hopeful signs that

[lionheart]

There are hopeful signs that we are shifting away from our heavy reliance on fossil fuels: more than ten times as much energy is generated through wind power now than it was in 1990.

A) generated through wind power now than it was
B) generated through wind power now as it was
C) generated through wind power now as was the case
D) now generated through wind power as it was
E) now generated through wind power then was the case

[vic_gmat]

is the answer B?

[nagm]

Answer is C

[RonPurewal]

i could've sworn this problem was in another thread, but the search box won't find it.

there are two splits you should use to narrow down this problem:

(1) the second half of the construction 'ten times as much ... ____' is as, not than. therefore, you can eliminate answers (a) and (e), which contain 'than'. (i'm assuming that (e) is supposed to say 'than', not 'then'; i don't think the gmat problems would that blatant an error)

(2) the pronoun 'it' is inappropriate, because 'it' must refer to the ENTIRETY of the noun phrase serving as an antecedent.
for instance, the following is an improper sentence: last year's attendance was ten thousand greater than it was this year
in the above sentence, the pronoun 'it' must necessarily refer to last year's attendance, not just attendance.
the problem in this post has the same issue: the pronoun 'it' must refer to more than ten times as much energy, not just energy - an interpretation that makes no logical sense. therefore, all answer choices containing the pronoun 'it' are wrong.

if you don't like '...than was the case', you should learn to like it; this is one of those phrases that the gmat writers use to refer to concepts that don't fit under the usage constraints of traditional pronouns. (another popular one of these constructions is 'do so'.)

[RonPurewal]

i could've sworn this problem was in another thread, but the search box won't find it.

there are two splits you should use to narrow down this problem:

(1) the second half of the construction 'ten times as much ... ____' is as, not than. therefore, you can eliminate answers (a) and (e), which contain 'than'. (i'm assuming that (e) is supposed to say 'than', not 'then'; i don't think the gmat problems would that blatant an error)

(2) the pronoun 'it' is inappropriate, because 'it' must refer to the ENTIRETY of the noun phrase serving as an antecedent.
for instance, the following is an improper sentence: last year's attendance was ten thousand greater than it was this year
in the above sentence, the pronoun 'it' must necessarily refer to last year's attendance, not just attendance.
the problem in this post has the same issue: the pronoun 'it' must refer to more than ten times as much energy, not just energy - an interpretation that makes no logical sense. therefore, all answer choices containing the pronoun 'it' are wrong.

if you don't like '...than was the case', you should learn to like it; this is one of those phrases that the gmat writers use to refer to concepts that don't fit under the usage constraints of traditional pronouns. (another popular one of these constructions is 'do so'.)

for an official problem that illustrates the same sort of problem with 'it', check out #34 in the purple og11 verbal supplement (please don't post any specifics of this problem here).

[qjqivy]

If we use "that" instead of "it", will it correct the sentence? Since "it" must refer to the same thing and "that" can refer to another instance.

[RonPurewal]

If we use "that" instead of "it", will it correct the sentence? Since "it" must refer to the same thing and "that" can refer to another instance.

no, since there is no construction that is properly parallel with "that in 1990".

here are two illustrations:

* the air quality of las vegas in 2007 was higher than that in 1997
--> CORRECT
note the perfect parallelism
(the air quality of las vegas) (in 2007)
parallel to
(that) (in 1997)

* the air quality of las vegas was higher in 2007 than that in 1997
--> INCORRECT
this isn't parallel; the left-hand structure is interrupted by a verb, while the right-hand structure contains no such verb.

[manjeet.singh]

great example ron..

if in your above example, i write
the air quality of las vegas was higher in 2007 than that was in 1997...is it parallel?

if it is not, please give an example how to make this example parallel

[RonPurewal]

great example ron..

if in your above example, i write
the air quality of las vegas was higher in 2007 than that was in 1997...is it parallel?

if it is not, please give an example how to make this example parallel

actually, there is no way to make this example work -- you cannot use "that" as a pronoun by itself. you can only use "that" as a relative pronoun when it is part of a parallel construction (e.g., "that of...", "that in...", "that used by...").

in general, i don't think that you can ever use "this", "that", or "those" as standalone pronouns. (i have, however, seen a single instance of "these" as a standalone pronoun, in one GMATPREP problem.)

[sm.proclivity]

Hi Ron, could you please throw some light on the usage of "now" in the given sentence. What if the given sentence has two options shown below:
A1) generated through wind power now as was the case
A2) now generated through wind power as was the case

Which one would you choose and why?
Thanking in anticipation.

[rohit801]

Ron,
you said:
------------------------------------------------------------
(2) the pronoun 'it' is inappropriate, because 'it' must refer to the ENTIRETY of the noun phrase serving as an antecedent.
for instance, the following is an improper sentence: last year's attendance was ten thousand greater than it was this year
in the above sentence, the pronoun 'it' must necessarily refer to last year's attendance, not just attendance.
------------------------------------------------------------

Makes perfect sense! To this point, the following question is from this forum [sometime earlier]:

In the 1980’s the rate of increase of the minority population of the United States was nearly twice as fast as the 1970’s.

(A) twice as fast as
(B) twice as fast as it was in
(C) twice what it was in
(D) two times faster than that of
(E) two times greater than

You had explained why C is the answer and rest are wrong.
So, Does the "it" refer to "THE RATE OF INCREASE OF XYZ?"
[yes, it does. --ron]

Given the context of this thread, and knowing the OA is right, can you help me understand this?

Apologize if this is a stupid question.

Thanks for all your help. I am now spending more time to figure out 'WHY' answers are right or wrong. Someday, when I learn this inside out, i will help others out.

[RonPurewal]

Hi Ron, could you please throw some light on the usage of "now" in the given sentence. What if the given sentence has two options shown below:
A1) generated through wind power now as was the case
A2) now generated through wind power as was the case

Which one would you choose and why?
Thanking in anticipation.

i'd go with a1, because it's more closely parallel with the other half of the sentence:
blah blah blah blah NOW vs.
blah blah blah blah IN 1990
in both halves, you've got the description first and the time frame second. your example #a2 switches the two things around, creating a sentence that is the more confusing and difficult to read.

[RonPurewal]

@ rohit801

So, Does the "it" refer to "THE RATE OF INCREASE OF XYZ?"

yes.

[llittlsnow]

B is wrong because it does not necessarily refers to energy only, but refers to more than ten times as much energy...now, how can we say the energy generated...now is as much as it(the energy generated...now) was in 1990?

I recalled one question that is similar to this one just for reference.

Over 75 percent of the energy produced in France derives from nuclear power, while in Germany it is just over 33 percent.

A. while in Germany it is just over 33 percent
B. compared to Germany, which uses just over 33 percent
C. whereas nuclear power accounts for just over 33 percent of the energy produced in Germany
D. whereas just over 33 percent of the energy comes from nuclear power in Germany
E. compared with the energy from nuclear power in Germany, where it is just over 33 percent

OA is C

eliminate A, because it refers to over 75 percent of the energy produced in France, not the energy only.

in the same way, the energy in C,D,E refers to the same precedence as A. so eliminate C,D,E

hope it can help

[RonPurewal]

B is wrong because it does not necessarily refers to energy only, but refers to more than ten times as much energy...now, how can we say the energy generated...now is as much as it(the energy generated...now) was in 1990?

I recalled one question that is similar to this one just for reference.

Over 75 percent of the energy produced in France derives from nuclear power, while in Germany it is just over 33 percent.

A. while in Germany it is just over 33 percent
B. compared to Germany, which uses just over 33 percent
C. whereas nuclear power accounts for just over 33 percent of the energy produced in Germany
D. whereas just over 33 percent of the energy comes from nuclear power in Germany
E. compared with the energy from nuclear power in Germany, where it is just over 33 percent

OA is C

eliminate A, because it refers to over 75 percent of the energy produced in France, not the energy only.

in the same way, the energy in C,D,E refers to the same precedence as A. so eliminate C,D,E

hope it can help

nice find!

both this problem and the problem in the thread are examples of the important principle that when a pronoun stands for a noun to which ESSENTIAL MODIFIERS (i.e., modifiers without commas) are attached, the pronoun must STAND FOR THE NOUN PLUS ALL ESSENTIAL MODIFIERS attached to the noun.