BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

complete the following

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 6:05 pm

complete the following

by sq720 » Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:11 am
8. Proponents of the electric car maintain that when the
technical problems associated with its battery design
are solved, such cars will be widely used and, because
they are emission-free, will result in an abatement of
the environmental degradation caused by auto
emissions. But unless we dam more rivers, the
electricity to charge these batteries will come from
nuclear or coal-fired power plants. Each of these three
power sources produces considerable environmental
damage. Thus, the electric car _______.
Which one of the following most logically completes
the argument?
(A) will have worse environmental consequences

than its proponents may believe
(B) will probably remain less popular than other
types of cars
(C) requires that purely technical problems be
solved before it can succeed
(D) will increase the total level of emissions rather
than reduce it
(E) will not produce a net reduction in
environmental degradation


Ans A what is wrong with E
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 2567
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:05 am
Thanked: 712 times
Followed by:550 members
GMAT Score:770

by DanaJ » Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:48 am
I agree with the OA here. You basically have two ideas presented in the passage:
- supporters of the electrical car say the use of such vehicles will result in an abatement of the environmental degradation caused by auto emissions
- to produce the necessary electricity to power these cars you need to build more dams or use other types of polluting energy

So, while the environmentalists believe the cars are great, they underestimate the impact they will have on the environment. It's true we'll have lower emissions, but that doesn't mean they won't still have an impact on nature.

E is not necessarily true. There might be a net reduction for all we know: the pollution produced by power plants might be lower than the current car emissions, so overall you have less pollution. We only know that, while there will be no car emissions, there will be some (we're not told how much) pollution from plants.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 9:14 am
Location: Atlanta
Thanked: 17 times

by pandeyvineet24 » Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:21 am
DanaJ wrote:I agree with the OA here. You basically have two ideas presented in the passage:
- supporters of the electrical car say the use of such vehicles will result in an abatement of the environmental degradation caused by auto emissions
- to produce the necessary electricity to power these cars you need to build more dams or use other types of polluting energy

So, while the environmentalists believe the cars are great, they underestimate the impact they will have on the environment. It's true we'll have lower emissions, but that doesn't mean they won't still have an impact on nature.

E is not necessarily true. There might be a net reduction for all we know: the pollution produced by power plants might be lower than the current car emissions, so overall you have less pollution. We only know that, while there will be no car emissions, there will be some (we're not told how much) pollution from plants.
Picked E here as Well.
I thought A was too extreme and not 100% true . How can we be sure that the pollution from nuclear and power plants is less than from vehicles ?

Please explain.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:36 am
hehhhhee!! Picked E very promptly and later got dumped by cing the OA!!

E was just too enticing..culdnt resist Boss!!
Top
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 2567
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:05 am
Thanked: 712 times
Followed by:550 members
GMAT Score:770

by DanaJ » Wed Sep 02, 2009 9:55 am
pandeyvineet24 wrote: Picked E here as Well.
I thought A was too extreme and not 100% true . How can we be sure that the pollution from nuclear and power plants is less than from vehicles ?

Please explain.
The fact is, we can't know for sure. This is why E is incorrect. You don't know if the damage caused by the power plants will be more than the damage caused by non-electric cars. The absence of a net reduction in environmental damage (i.e. option E) means that the power plants will cause more damage than current cars, but we can't really say for sure.

The deal with A is that it doesn't discuss the amount of pollution caused by power plants or by current cars. It just states that environmentalists are wrong when they assume that electric cars will eliminate car-related emissions: they will probably be reduced, but that doesn't mean that there will be ABSOLUTELY NO emissions.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:49 pm
Location: California
Thanked: 13 times
Followed by:3 members

by heshamelaziry » Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:47 am
DanaJ wrote:
pandeyvineet24 wrote: Picked E here as Well.
I thought A was too extreme and not 100% true . How can we be sure that the pollution from nuclear and power plants is less than from vehicles ?

Please explain.
The fact is, we can't know for sure. This is why E is incorrect. You don't know if the damage caused by the power plants will be more than the damage caused by non-electric cars. The absence of a net reduction in environmental damage (i.e. option E) means that the power plants will cause more damage than current cars, but we can't really say for sure.

The deal with A is that it doesn't discuss the amount of pollution caused by power plants or by current cars. It just states that environmentalists are wrong when they assume that electric cars will eliminate car-related emissions: they will probably be reduced, but that doesn't mean that there will be ABSOLUTELY NO emissions.
You are stating what is mentioned in A. Taking A shows that emmisions will hurt the environment more than other factors, which we can not judge based on the stimulus.

I still would have chosen E on the test. It is general and does not imply emotional and extreme judgment based on insufficient information as A does.
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 7:50 am
Location: Washington DC
Thanked: 2 times
GMAT Score:600

by ershovici » Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:52 pm
The logic formula for this answer is - if X then Y will happen, but unless Z happen Y could not happen.

Guys just think about the following:
In the statement we have - will result in an abatement of the environmental degradation caused by
auto emissions - which is followed by "But unless we dam more rivers"

So we shoul refute the statement, and the best one is " will not produce a net reduction in environmental degradation "So E is right answer.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 2:26 am

by khanshainur » Mon May 16, 2016 12:06 am
Looking at it now, E makes sense
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1