Critical Reasoning

Nitrogen dioxide is a pollutant emitted by automobiles. Catalytic converters, devices designed to reduce nitrogen dioxide emissions, have been required in all new cars in Donia since 1993, and as a result, nitrogen dioxide emissions have been significantly reduced throughout most of the country. Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia's capital city has always been comparatively high, nitrogen dioxide emissions there have showed only an insignificant decline since 1993.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the insignificant decline in nitrogen dioxide emissions in Donia's capital city?

A) More of the cars in Donia's capital city were before 1993 than after 1993.

B) The number of new cars sold per year in Donia has declined slightly since 1993.

C) Pollutants other than nitrogen dioxide that are emitted by automobiles have also been significantly reduced in Donia since 1993.

D) Many Donians who own cars made before 1993 have had catalytic converters installed in their cars.

E) Most car trips in Donia's capital city are too short for the catalytic converter to reach its effective working temperature.

IMO E

Its between A and E, I will go for E

IMO E
it is between A and E, but in A "more" is not very convincing

IMO "D"

Since the instrument was already installed in most of the old cars...we can infer that the level of emission is already low...

I'm sorry I didn't post the answer before. I just learned that answers can be hidden.

The OA is E.

Should be E.

trumpet1184 wrote:Nitrogen dioxide is a pollutant emitted by automobiles. Catalytic converters, devices designed to reduce nitrogen dioxide emissions, have been required in all new cars in Donia since 1993, and as a result, nitrogen dioxide emissions have been significantly reduced throughout most of the country. Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia's capital city has always been comparatively high, nitrogen dioxide emissions there have showed only an insignificant decline since 1993.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the insignificant decline in nitrogen dioxide emissions in Donia's capital city?

A) More of the cars in Donia's capital city were before 1993 than after 1993.

B) The number of new cars sold per year in Donia has declined slightly since 1993.

C) Pollutants other than nitrogen dioxide that are emitted by automobiles have also been significantly reduced in Donia since 1993.

D) Many Donians who own cars made before 1993 have had catalytic converters installed in their cars.

E) Most car trips in Donia's capital city are too short for the catalytic converter to reach its effective working temperature.

E is correct here,
If the convertor doesnot reach effectove working temp. then how will the catalytic action come into picture
This will mar the chances of lessening the amout of nitro in atmosp, justifying the "INSIGNIFICANT DECLINE"

mmslf is correct.

You should read the question stem first (step 1 of the Kaplan method).

The question stem here tells us that we are dealing with an "explain" or "paradox" question. Therefore, the stimulus will NOT present an argument, and it makes no sense to think about conclusion and assumption. Instead, in paradox questions, the stimulus will present a set of facts out of which will arise a paradox or contradiction or surprise of some sort. Understand what the paradox is, and then go to the answer choices looking for one that will be logically capable of resolving it.

Here, the paradox is that in the capital city there's all these new cars with catalytic converters and yet nitrogen dioxide emissions have not gone down. But the function of the catalytic converts is to reduce nitrodgen dioxide emissions. So, then why the heck did nitrogen dioxide emissions not go down in the capital city?...that's the paradox.

Now, we are ready go to the choices, asking ourselves: "which answer choice will resolve this paradox, relieve this surprise?"

choice E tells us that trips in the capital city are so short that the catalytic converter doesn't even get time to warm up so that it can operate. Oh, so that's it: although most of the cars in the capital city are new and so have these converters, the trips are so short that the converters don't even kick in. That resolves the paradox.

Testluv wrote:mmslf is correct.

You should read the question stem first (step 1 of the Kaplan method).

The question stem here tells us that we are dealing with an "explain" or "paradox" question. Therefore, the stimulus will NOT present an argument, and it makes no sense to think about conclusion and assumption. Instead, in paradox questions, the stimulus will present a set of facts out of which will arise a paradox or contradiction or surprise of some sort. Understand what the paradox is, and then go to the answer choices looking for one that will be logically capable of resolving it.

Here, the paradox is that in the capital city there's all these new cars with catalytic converters and yet nitrogen dioxide emissions have not gone down. But the function of the catalytic converts is to reduce nitrodgen dioxide emissions. So, then why the heck did nitrogen dioxide emissions not go down in the capital city?...that's the paradox.

Now, we are ready go to the choices, asking ourselves: "which answer choice will resolve this paradox, relieve this surprise?"

choice E tells us that trips in the capital city are so short that the catalytic converter doesn't even get time to warm up so that it can operate. Oh, so that's it: although most of the cars in the capital city are new and so have these converters, the trips are so short that the converters don't even kick in. That resolves the paradox.

I can see why E is correct. But can't D be correct as well?

My reasoning: If the cars in the city already had catalytic converters, then the nitrogen dioxide levels would already be low, and thus the requirement imposed in 1993 will NOT have a significant effect on the nitrogen dioxide levels.

Please read the answer choice carefully. This is one of the basics required to not carelessly tick a wrong answer choice. Does answer choice D mention that only Cars in Donian Captial City had catalytic converters installed previously?. That should answer your question.

Ah, I see it now. I guess I was misinterpreting the entire sentence.. it's amazing what a fresh new day and mind will do to your reading abilities

nileshdalvi wrote:Please read the answer choice carefully. This is one of the basics required to not carelessly tick a wrong answer choice. Does answer choice D mention that only Cars in Donian Captial City had catalytic converters installed previously?. That should answer your question.

Wow, good point

Could someone please explain what's wrong in the following reasoning?

Stimulus says"Catalytic converters, devices designed to reduce nitrogen dioxide emissions, have been required in all
new cars in Donia since 1993"......... Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia's capital city has always been comparatively high...."

(A):"More of the cars in Donia's capital city were made before 1993 than after 1993"

If more of the cars were made before 1993 then those would not be equipped with converters, leading to insignificant decline in nitrogen dioxide emissions in Donia's capital city.

CaptainM wrote:Could someone please explain what's wrong in the following reasoning?

Stimulus says"Catalytic converters, devices designed to reduce nitrogen dioxide emissions, have been required in all
new cars in Donia since 1993"......... Yet although the proportion of new cars in Donia's capital city has always been comparatively high...."

(A):"More of the cars in Donia's capital city were made before 1993 than after 1993"

If more of the cars were made before 1993 then those would not be equipped with converters, leading to insignificant decline in nitrogen dioxide emissions in Donia's capital city.

There's a possibility that these cars can be fitted with convertor kits. E is the strongest as it weakens the argument in all cases.