-
aspirant2011
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1574
- Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 am
- Thanked: 88 times
- Followed by:13 members
The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it could cut its refining costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all refining at its Tasberg refinery. Closing the Grenville refinery, however, would mean the immediate loss of about 1,200 jobs in the Grenville area. Eventually the lives of more than 10,000 people would be seriously disrupted. Therefore, OLEX's decision, announced yesterday, to keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits. Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument given?
A. The Grenville refinery, although it operates at a higher cost than the Tasberg refinery, has nevertheless been moderately profitable for many years.
B. Even though OLEX could consolidate all its refining at the Tasberg plant, doing so at the Grenville plant would not be feasible.
C. The Tasberg refinery is more favorably situated than the Grenville refinery with respect to the major supply routes for raw petroleum.
D. If the Grenville refinery were ever closed and operations at the Tasberg refinery expanded, job openings at Tasberg would to the extent possible be filled with people formerly employed at Grenville.
E. Closure of the Grenville refinery would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.
[spoiler]OA: Will be posted later. I have one doubt i.e
Assumption : OLEX didn't shut down the plant because the lives of 10,000 people would have got impacted.
Conclusion: Therefore, OLEX's decision, announced yesterday, to keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits.
Strategy : In case of assumption question I read somewhere that we should find that answer choice which when negated makes the conclusion fall apart.
Now if I use the above strategy and try to negate option A, then option A becomes
A. The Grenville refinery, although it operates at a higher cost than the Tasberg refinery, has been moderately profitable for many years. -----> isn't this option making conclusion fall apart by stating that Greenville refinery has not been shut down because though being expensive it has been profitable.
Please correct me if I am wrong.......[/spoiler]
A. The Grenville refinery, although it operates at a higher cost than the Tasberg refinery, has nevertheless been moderately profitable for many years.
B. Even though OLEX could consolidate all its refining at the Tasberg plant, doing so at the Grenville plant would not be feasible.
C. The Tasberg refinery is more favorably situated than the Grenville refinery with respect to the major supply routes for raw petroleum.
D. If the Grenville refinery were ever closed and operations at the Tasberg refinery expanded, job openings at Tasberg would to the extent possible be filled with people formerly employed at Grenville.
E. Closure of the Grenville refinery would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.
[spoiler]OA: Will be posted later. I have one doubt i.e
Assumption : OLEX didn't shut down the plant because the lives of 10,000 people would have got impacted.
Conclusion: Therefore, OLEX's decision, announced yesterday, to keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits.
Strategy : In case of assumption question I read somewhere that we should find that answer choice which when negated makes the conclusion fall apart.
Now if I use the above strategy and try to negate option A, then option A becomes
A. The Grenville refinery, although it operates at a higher cost than the Tasberg refinery, has been moderately profitable for many years. -----> isn't this option making conclusion fall apart by stating that Greenville refinery has not been shut down because though being expensive it has been profitable.
Please correct me if I am wrong.......[/spoiler]
) if negation is not done properly.
........
