Question

Argument or Nonargument ?

A space elevator is a practical alternative to traditional rocketry for getting goods and supplies into orbit. This conclusion follows from the fact that traditional rocketry is a largely inefficient use of energy because most of the energy in rocket fuel is dissipated as heat in the atmosphere. Moreover, advances in our ability to station a satellite in geosynchronous orbit, along with advances in construction materials, eliminate previous difficulties in rendering a space elevator practical.

Answer 1

The passage presents an argument for the practicality of a space elevator as an alternative to traditional rocketry by highlighting the inefficiencies in rocket fuel use and advancements in technology that make space elevators feasible.

Step-by-step explanation:

The question presented asks to identify if a passage is an argument or a nonargument. The passage argues that a space elevator is a practical alternative to traditional rocketry for putting goods and supplies into orbit, making it an argument. This claim is supported by noting the inefficiencies of traditional rocketry, where much of the energy from fuel ends up as heat dissipated in the atmosphere. Additionally, technological advances in geosynchronous satellites and construction materials have solved some of the past challenges of making a space elevator feasible.

The space shuttle was designed as an economical vehicle for space transport, with some parts meant to be reusable. However, the need for human operation led to significant costs. Additionally, the immense energy requirements for launching payloads into space, as articulated with the example of the Saturn V rocket, highlights the inefficiency of current rocketry methods. Lastly, it's noted that rockets are more efficient in outer space due to the lack of air, which means no thrust is provided by the atmosphere, and there is reduced air friction compared to within Earth's atmosphere