Reclaimation of land

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 132
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 7:53 pm
Location: Gurgaon
Thanked: 1 times

Reclaimation of land

by rookiez » Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:52 am
Can someone explain the line of reasoning and answer? I am completely stumped.

Q2:
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operators of surface mines to pay for the reclamation of mined-out land. Since then, reclamation technology has not improved. Yet, the average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine being reclaimed today is only four dollars per ton of coal that the mine produced, less than half what it cost to reclaim surface mines in the years immediately after the regulations took effect.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to account for the drop in reclamation costs described?
A. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, coal mines in Balzania continued to be less expensive to operate than coal mines in almost any other country.
B. In the twenty years since the regulations took effect, the use of coal as a fuel has declined from the level it was at in the previous twenty years.
C. Mine operators have generally ceased surface mining in the mountainous areas of Balzania because reclamation costs per ton of coal produced are particularly high for mines in such areas.

D. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, surface mines continued to produce coal at a lower total cost than underground mines.
E. As compared to twenty years ago, a greater percentage of the coal mined in Balzania today comes from surface mines.

QA C
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Legendary Member
Posts: 1035
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:56 pm
Thanked: 104 times
Followed by:1 members

by scoobydooby » Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:24 am
to explain why reclamation costs fell

A. comparison with any other country is out of scope.

B. decline in the use of coal doesnt explain why reclamation costs fell. if anything, coal costs prices may have fallen. no information about reclamation costs

C. by POE. now coal is no longer surface mined at mountainous regions where reclamation costs are high=> coal is now mined at regions where reclamation costs are low. explains the fall in reclamation costs.

D. coal production costs are out of scope

E. greater % of coal coming from surface mines does not explain why reclamation costs fell.

Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Sat Aug 22, 2009 8:56 am
scoobydooby wrote:to explain why reclamation costs fell

A. comparison with any other country is out of scope.

B. decline in the use of coal doesnt explain why reclamation costs fell. if anything, coal costs prices may have fallen. no information about reclamation costs

C. by POE. now coal is no longer surface mined at mountainous regions where reclamation costs are high=> coal is now mined at regions where reclamation costs are low. explains the fall in reclamation costs.

D. coal production costs are out of scope

E. greater % of coal coming from surface mines does not explain why reclamation costs fell.
Awesome scooby !!!

My line of reasoning was confirmed after reading your post.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 208
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2009 11:32 am
Location: Mumbai
Thanked: 2 times

by vikram_k51 » Sat Aug 22, 2009 9:03 am
Will go with B.It explains why the cost of reclamation has decreased.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 447
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: Kolkata,India
Thanked: 7 times
GMAT Score:670

by uptowngirl92 » Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:08 am
Hmm..understood why C is the correct answer but could somebody please please explain B?
If the use of coal has declined then the coal prioces have decreased..which means that reclamation costs will also go down..:(

Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Mon Oct 26, 2009 7:47 am
vikram_k51 wrote:Will go with B.It explains why the cost of reclamation has decreased.
@Vikram, Even me too initially buzzed for B.

let me unwind the entanglements :

Option B says that "Only use of Coal as a fuel has declined." It not " Necessarily" means that the coal that the mine produced has declined .There could have been some there source of fuel would have popped up in the twenty years gap.

Secondly..Reclamation costs are chartered only by the amount of coal PRODUCED by the mine and not by any other factor( inclusive of its usage as quoted by B).

On that Note Option C hints that to maintain the same profit margin ,one way is to lower your reclamation costs.so people have ceased mining in mountainous area.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 200
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:27 am

by james33 » Sun May 15, 2016 9:51 pm
Looking at it now, B makes sense