City council member: Demand for electricity has been increasing by 1.5 percent a year, and there simply is no more space to build additional power plants to meet future demand increases. We must therefore begin to curtail usage, which is why I propose passing ordinances requiring energy-conservation measures in all city departments.
The city council member's proposal assumes which of the following?
A. Existing power plants do not have capacity to handle all of the projected increase in demand for electricity.
B. No city departments have implemented energy-conservation measures voluntarily.
C. Passing ordinances designed to curtail electricity usage will not have negative economic consequences for the city.
D. Residential consumers are not responsible for the recent increases in demand for electricity.
E. City departments that successfully conserve energy will set a good example for residential and industrial consumers of electricity.
A
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
OG City Council Member Q
This topic has expert replies
-
AbeNeedsAnswers
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 394
- Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 10:59 am
- Thanked: 1 times
- Followed by:5 members
-
DavidG@VeritasPrep
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 2663
- Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 am
- Location: Boston, MA
- Thanked: 1153 times
- Followed by:128 members
- GMAT Score:770
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
Conclusion: We must curtail electricity usage.AbeNeedsAnswers wrote:City council member: Demand for electricity has been increasing by 1.5 percent a year, and there simply is no more space to build additional power plants to meet future demand increases. We must therefore begin to curtail usage, which is why I propose passing ordinances requiring energy-conservation measures in all city departments.
The city council member's proposal assumes which of the following?
A. Existing power plants do not have capacity to handle all of the projected increase in demand for electricity.
B. No city departments have implemented energy-conservation measures voluntarily.
C. Passing ordinances designed to curtail electricity usage will not have negative economic consequences for the city.
D. Residential consumers are not responsible for the recent increases in demand for electricity.
E. City departments that successfully conserve energy will set a good example for residential and industrial consumers of electricity.
A
Premise: Demand is increasing, but there is no more room to build new power plants.
We can try negation here. If correct answer, when negated, will undermine the conclusion.
A negated: Existing power plants DO have capacity to handle all of the projected increase in demand for electricity.
Well if the plants have the capacity to handle the increase in demand, there'd be no need to build those new power plants that we've been told there's no room for. Thus, it would no longer be essential to curtail usage. Because A's negation undermines the conclusion, we know we have our answer.
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
Brent@GMATPrepNow
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 16207
- Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 6:26 pm
- Location: Vancouver, BC
- Thanked: 5254 times
- Followed by:1268 members
- GMAT Score:770
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
PREMISE: Electricity demands increase 1.5% per yearAbeNeedsAnswers wrote:City council member: Demand for electricity has been increasing by 1.5 percent a year, and there simply is no more space to build additional power plants to meet future demand increases. We must therefore begin to curtail usage, which is why I propose passing ordinances requiring energy-conservation measures in all city departments.
The city council member's proposal assumes which of the following?
A. Existing power plants do not have capacity to handle all of the projected increase in demand for electricity.
B. No city departments have implemented energy-conservation measures voluntarily.
C. Passing ordinances designed to curtail electricity usage will not have negative economic consequences for the city.
D. Residential consumers are not responsible for the recent increases in demand for electricity.
E. City departments that successfully conserve energy will set a good example for residential and industrial consumers of electricity.
A
PREMISE: No space to build more power plants
CONCLUSION: We must use LESS electricity through ordinances
Strategy #1: Try to think of an assumption that's required for the conclusion to logically follow from the premises.
Notice that nothing is mentioned about how the power plants are handing the present demands.
After all, it could be the case that, to meet the present demands, the power plants need only operate at 5% capacity, in which case, it may not be necessary to implement energy-conservation measures.
As assumption is that the existing power plants are not able to handle increases in demand
Now look for YOUR answer among the answer choices . . . answer choice A seems similar to our assumption.
Answer: A
ASIDE: In many cases, you will be unable to identify a needed assumption. No problem.
This brings us to . . .
Strategy #2: NEGATE each answer choice. If the NEGATED assumption DESTROYS the conclusion, then that answer choice must be correct.
Why? If the negated assumption destroys the conclusion, we must need that assumption to be true.
A) Existing power plants DO have capacity to handle all of the projected increase in demand for electricity.
Does this negated statement DESTROY the conclusion that the city must use LESS electricity through ordinances?
YES!! It kills the conclusion.
If we have enough capacity to handle future demand, there's no NEED to use less power.
Answer: A
Cheers,
Brent
Brent Hanneson - Creator of GMATPrepNow.com
