CR 1000

This topic has expert replies
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 6:17 am

CR 1000

by jcovarrubiasu » Tue Jul 24, 2007 7:19 pm
Why the answer is using platic, is not this out of scope?

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 83
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 9:08 am
Thanked: 5 times
GMAT Score:610

by scholardream » Thu May 03, 2012 4:50 pm
My answer:
Premise 1: Total weight of beverage containers REDUCES continuously
Premise 2: using of AL & glass containers is the main reason
Premise 3: AL cans is used more than glass cans
Premise 4: in Total weight of beverage containers, Glass cans is reduced MORE than AL cans
Questions: what help resolve the paradox above
My expected answer: AL & glass cans should be REPLACED by lighter cans and more glass cans are replaced compared to AL cans so the ADDITIONAL information won't go against any of above premises.
Looking into the answer choice:
(A) Can't explain why the Premise 2 valid
(B) We talk about the Total weight of beverage cans, not about recycled cans or non-recycled cans -> out of scope
(C) it fits my expectation -> should be the answer
(D) This additional information can't help explain the reduction of Total weight of beverage cans
(E) Clearly out of scope

So my answer is C