Most of the world's supply of uranium currently comes

Expert replies

aspirant2011: Legendary Member; Posts: 1574; Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 amFollowed by: 13 members; Thanked: 88 times

by aspirant2011 » Sun May 01, 2011 7:05 am

Most of the world's supply of uranium currently comes from mines. It is possible to extract uranium from seawater, but the cost of doing so is greater than the price that uranium fetches on the world market. Therefore, until the cost of extracting uranium from seawater can somehow be reduced, this method of obtaining uranium is unlikely to be commercially viable.

Which of the following would it be most useful to determine in evaluating the argument?

A. Whether the uranium in deposits on land is rapidly being depleted
B. Whether most uranium is used near where it is mined
C. Whether there are any technological advances that show promise of reducing the cost of extracting uranium from seawater
D. Whether the total amount of uranium in seawater is significantly greater than the total amount of uranium on land
E. Whether uranium can be extracted from freshwater at a cost similar to the cost of extracting it from seawater

[spoiler]OA: A vs C???? Which one is better and why?????[/spoiler]

Source: Beat The GMAT — Critical Reasoning | Sun May 01, 2011 7:05 am

Calvin123: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 63; Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:25 pm; Thanked: 3 times

by Calvin123 » Sun May 01, 2011 7:43 am

aspirant2011 wrote:Most of the world's supply of uranium currently comes from mines. It is possible to extract uranium from seawater, but the cost of doing so is greater than the price that uranium fetches on the world market. Therefore, until the cost of extracting uranium from seawater can somehow be reduced, this method of obtaining uranium is unlikely to be commercially viable.

Which of the following would it be most useful to determine in evaluating the argument?

A. Whether the uranium in deposits on land is rapidly being depleted
B. Whether most uranium is used near where it is mined
C. Whether there are any technological advances that show promise of reducing the cost of extracting uranium from seawater
D. Whether the total amount of uranium in seawater is significantly greater than the total amount of uranium on land
E. Whether uranium can be extracted from freshwater at a cost similar to the cost of extracting it from seawater

[spoiler]OA: A vs C???? Which one is better and why?????[/spoiler]

It should be A.
A. If deposits are being depleted rapidly then it will be commercially viable to extract from sea water, even if the extraction cost from sea water remains high. In near future if demand remains constant and land deposits are insufficient then the market price of uranium will go up.

C. If my explanation of A makes some sense then this is automatically out, isn't it!

What is OA?

aspirant2011: Legendary Member; Posts: 1574; Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:52 amFollowed by: 13 members; Thanked: 88 times

by aspirant2011 » Sun May 01, 2011 8:23 am

yup the OA is A...........can you please tell me one thing that did u reject C solely on the basis of A because I agree C is less strong an option as compared to A but if "there are technological advances happening for cheap extraction" then I don't feel that C is a bad option.....please correct me if I am wrong..........

GMATMadeEasy: Legendary Member; Posts: 768; Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 3:46 amFollowed by: 7 members; Thanked: 21 times

by GMATMadeEasy » Mon May 02, 2011 5:42 am

@aspirant2011 : It is not that A is better than C . It is somple that C does nothing basically.

Cause (cost of an extraction method not reduced) - > Effect (the method is not effective)

or cost reduced - method might be effective.

Let's operate C:
good, technologigy is going ot be wonderful , so cost will go down and what next ? Conclusion has told us already .. when cause is there, effect is there.. so we know this method will be viable

sorry, technologigy is not going ot be wonderful , so cost will go NOT down and what next ? Conclusion has told us already .. when cause is NOT there, effect is NOT there.. so we know this method will NOT be viable

C has no impact whatsoever.

What do these test makers eat to nourish their brain.

GMAT Course Reviews

563 reviews

1168 reviews

431 reviews

359 reviews

147 reviews

5/5

5 Star (563 Reviews)

"Target Test Prep is the closest to the official version of the GMAT exam, about 99% accuracy in terms of the quality and quantity of information. The course has excellently created singular sets of focused lessons and tests for every possible topic that one could come across in the official GMAT exam."

"The TTP course maximizes the efficiency of the time you spend studying. It will take time and effort but I could almost guarantee that if you complete the course exactly as it is laid out you will get an amazing score. They also have a very responsive team willing to help with any questions you might have."

"TTP has two things that I think no other test prep company offers: A teaching approach that reinforces understanding and an attitude that will give you the mental preparedness needed to succeed on the test. TTP gives you a deep understanding of the concept you need to know while teaching you how to think."

Write a Review