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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Petrochemical industry officials have said that the extreme

Expert replies
by BTGmoderatorDC » Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:09 pm

Timer

00:00

Answers

A

B

C

D

E

Stats

Difficulty

Petrochemical industry officials have said that the extreme pressure exerted on plant managers during the last five years to improve profits by cutting costs has done nothing to impair the industry's ability to operate safely. However, environmentalists contend that the recent rash of serious oil spills and accidents at petrochemical plants is traceable to cost-cutting measures.

Which of the following, if true, would provide the strongest support for the position held by industry officials?

(A) The petrochemical industry benefits if accidents do not occur, since accidents involve risk of employee injury as well as loss of equipment and product.

(B) Petrochemical industry unions recently demanded that additional money be spent on safety and environment protection measures, but the unions readily abandoned those demands in exchange for job security.

(C) Despite major cutbacks in most other areas of operation, the petrochemical industry has devoted more of its resources to environmental and safety measures in the last five years than in the preceding five years.

(D) There is evidence that the most damaging of the recent oil spills would have been prevented had cost-cutting measures not been instituted.

(E) Both the large fines and adverse publicity generated by the most recent oil spills have prompted the petrochemical industry to increase the resources devoted to oil-spill prevention.

OA C

Source: Official Guide
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by deloitte247 » Thu Oct 04, 2018 11:53 am
Option A - INCORRECT.
According to the statement by the petrochemical industry officials, it is obvious that the petrochemical industry benefits if accidents do not occur, since accidents involve risk of employee injury as well as loss of equipment and product. Hence, this statement is not the main purpose of the argument.

Option B - INCORRECT.
The statement in this option maybe true, but was not in anyway stated in the argument to ascertain the reason behind the cutting cost. However, the Petrochemical industry unions may have demanded that additional money be spent on safety and environment protection measures, but the unions have recently abandoned those demands in exchange for job security over-sighting life security.

Option C - CORRECT.
This option has proven to support the Petrochemical industries officials. According to the statement by the officials of the petrochemical industries, it is obvious that despite the major cutbacks in most other areas of operation, the petrochemical industry has devoted more of its resources to environmental and safety measures in the last five years than in the preceding five years. However, this mission in the last five years has been unable to prove worthy of curbing the recent rash of serious oil spills and accidents at petrochemical plants and this has also been traceable to the mission of cost-cutting measures.

Option D - INCORRECT.
Critically analyzing the statement provided, there is evidence that the most damaging of the recent oil spills would have been prevented had cost-cutting measures not been instituted by the union.

Option E- INCORRECT.
This option i think is an assumption deduced from the argument, because if both the large fines and adverse publicity generated by the most recent oil spills have prompted the petrochemical industry to increase the resources devoted to oil-spill prevention, there won't be an argument on the improper management of oil spillage and other environmental hazards in the petrochemical industries.
Join the discussion