Thanks!logitech wrote:You hit the nail on the head again bro!Somerandomguy wrote:Hmm..is this an LSAT question? Yummy...
1) Weaken Q
2) Focus on the conclusion and its support.
(A) The cost of collecting, sorting, and recycling discarded plastics is currently higher than the cost of manufacturing new plastics from virgin materials.
Eliminate: Out of scope. Who cares about the cost, we're talking about harming the environment.
(B) Many consumers are unaware of the codes that are stamped on the plastic containers.
Eliminate: Still consistent with info given and thus irrelevant. If "most" people are aware, they could reduce their consumption.
(C) A plastic container almost always has a higher code number after it is recycled than it had before recycling because the recycling process causes a degradation of the quality of the plastic.
My choice. Should people keep purchasing the lowered numbered plastics, there would be a net increase in higher numbered plastics as more lowered numbered plastics are bought and recycled. Therefore, the environment is still harmed.
(D) Products packaged in plastics with the lowest code numbers are often more expensive than those packaged in the higher-numbered plastics.
Eliminate: Out of scope. Again, costs.
(E) Communities that collect all discarded plastic containers for potential recycling later dump in landfills plastics with higher-numbered codes only when it is clear that no recycler will take them.
Eliminate: Still consistent with info given, thus irrelevant. If consumers are not purchasing the higher-numbered plastics, there won't be much to dump anyways.
Well done! 8) Let me me the first who gives you a big THANKS!
