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

Redeem

airplane manufacturer

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 12 times

airplane manufacturer

by nikhilkatira » Wed Jun 23, 2010 5:30 am
In response to mounting pubic concern, an airplane manufacturer implemented a program with the well-publicized goal of reducing by half the total yearly amount of hazardous waste generated by its passenger-jet division. When the program began in 1994, the division's hazardous waste output was 90 pounds per production worker; last year it was 40 pounds per production worker. Clearly, therefore, charges that the manufacturer's program has not met its goal are false.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. The amount of nonhazardous waste generated each year by the passenger-jet division has not increased significantly since 1994.

B. At least as many passenger jets were produced by the division last year as had been produced in 1994.

C. Since 1994, other divisions in the company have achieved reductions in hazardous waste output that are at least equal to that achieved in the passenger-jet division.

D. The average number of weekly hours per production worker in the passenger-jet division was not significantly greater last year than it was in 1994.

E. The number of production workers assigned to the passenger-jet division was not significantly less in 1994 than it was last year
Best,
Nikhil H. Katira
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 392
Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 2:42 am
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 116 times
Followed by:10 members
GMAT Score:770

by albatross86 » Wed Jun 23, 2010 5:45 am
The goal was to REDUCE BY HALF the annual waste output.
In 1994 waste/worker = 90 and Last year it was 40
The argument's conclusion is that, basically, the airline has achieved its goal.

Prephrased assumption: 90*(1994 workers) is atleast double of 40*(Last year's workers) Thus, we have assumed that the number of workers wasn't significantly more in 1994.


A. Non-hazardous waste is irrelevant.

B. No. of jets produced bears no relation as per the argument, to the amount of waste produced.

C. Other divisions are irrelevant.

D. We are not told anything about 90pounds per worker per weekly hour or anything like that, just pounds per worker, so we cannot factor in the number of hours the worker worked per week at all. Quite likely the argument meant 90lbs per year.

E. Bingo. This is precisely what we prephrased our assumption as.


Pick E.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 8:50 am
Thanked: 29 times
Followed by:3 members

by diebeatsthegmat » Thu Jul 01, 2010 11:24 am
nikhilkatira wrote:In response to mounting pubic concern, an airplane manufacturer implemented a program with the well-publicized goal of reducing by half the total yearly amount of hazardous waste generated by its passenger-jet division. When the program began in 1994, the division's hazardous waste output was 90 pounds per production worker; last year it was 40 pounds per production worker. Clearly, therefore, charges that the manufacturer's program has not met its goal are false.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. The amount of nonhazardous waste generated each year by the passenger-jet division has not increased significantly since 1994.

B. At least as many passenger jets were produced by the division last year as had been produced in 1994.

C. Since 1994, other divisions in the company have achieved reductions in hazardous waste output that are at least equal to that achieved in the passenger-jet division.

D. The average number of weekly hours per production worker in the passenger-jet division was not significantly greater last year than it was in 1994.

E. The number of production workers assigned to the passenger-jet division was not significantly less in 1994 than it was last year
E +
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1