• NEW! FREE Beat The GMAT Quizzes
    NEW! FREE Beat The GMAT Quizzes
    NEW! FREE Beat The GMAT Quizzes
    Hundreds of Questions Highly Detailed Reporting Expert Explanations TAKE A FREE GMAT QUIZ
  • 7 CATs FREE!
    If you earn 100 Forum Points

    Engage in the Beat The GMAT forums to earn
    100 points for $49 worth of Veritas practice GMATs FREE

    Veritas Prep
    VERITAS PRACTICE GMAT EXAMS
    Earn 10 Points Per Post
    Earn 10 Points Per Thanks
    Earn 10 Points Per Upvote
    REDEEM NOW

Several threads in the past - Still not sure of OA - Pl Help

This topic has 7 member replies

Several threads in the past - Still not sure of OA - Pl Help

Post
Brochure: Help conserve our city’s water supply. By converting the landscaping in your
yard to a water-conserving landscape, you can greatly reduce your outdoor water use. A
water-conserving landscape is natural and attractive, and it also saves you money.

Criticism: For most people with yards, the savings from converting to a water-conserving
landscape cannot justify the expense of new landscaping, since typically the conversion
would save less than twenty dollars on a homeowner’s yearly water bills.

Which of the following, if true, provides the best basis for a rebuttal of the
criticism?

A. Even homeowners whose yards do not have water-conserving landscapes can conserve
water by installing water-saving devices in their homes.

B. A conventional landscape generally requires a much greater expenditure on fertilizer and
herbicide than does a water-conserving landscape.

C. A significant proportion of the residents of the city live in buildings that do not have yards.

D. It costs no more to put in water-conserving landscaping than it does to put in conventional
landscaping.

E. Some homeowners use more water to maintain their yards than they use for all other
purposes combined.

My answer is B. Can anyone please confirm.

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Joined
08 Jul 2009
Posted:
342 messages
Followed by:
19 members
Upvotes:
214
Test Date:
24/04/2009
GMAT Score:
740
Facebook Logo
Post
Hey Gauraku,

It's a close call between B and E.

I would go for E.

Reason being that B is too restrictive. It only talks of expenditure on fertiliser and herbicides being more for a water conserving landscape but we are concerned with the overall costs involved. b does not provide information on overall costs.

E says that most of the water requirement goes on maintaining the conventional landscape so if this is true, then the water saving landscape will significantly reduce water requirement for these houses. I think this is the best criticism.

What's the OA?

_________________
Folks please check this out
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7p56NzAVKc

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
25 Mar 2012
Posted:
341 messages
Followed by:
4 members
Upvotes:
17
Test Date:
07/09/2013
Target GMAT Score:
700+
GMAT Score:
720
Post
(B) should be correct. Basically the criticism is that there are hardly any savings (less than 20 bucks per year) from converting to a water-conserving landscape.

Choice (B) tells us that owners will be saving on more than just water bill e.g fertilizer and herbicide expenditures.



hope this helps.

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Joined
23 May 2012
Posted:
79 messages
Upvotes:
10
Target GMAT Score:
800
Post
Brochure: Help conserve our city’s water supply. By converting the landscaping in your
yard to a water-conserving landscape, you can greatly reduce your outdoor water use. A
water-conserving landscape is natural and attractive, and it also saves you money.

Criticism: For most people with yards, the savings from converting to a water-conserving
landscape cannot justify the expense of new landscaping, since typically the conversion
would save less than twenty dollars on a homeowner’s yearly water bills.


A. Even homeowners whose yards do not have water-conserving landscapes can conserve
water by installing water-saving devices in their homes.
->Brochure and Criticism are with those who have yards. Out of scope.
B. A conventional landscape generally requires a much greater expenditure on fertilizer and herbicide than does a water-conserving landscape.
->Criticism says water conserving landscape only saves less than $20. but This option tells, expenditures on fertilizer and herbicides are also saved. So, This is possible answer.
C. A significant proportion of the residents of the city live in buildings that do not have yards.
-> Out of scope with the same reason of 'A'.
D. It costs no more to put in water-conserving landscaping than it does to put in conventional
landscaping.
-> This actually strengthens the criticism.
E. Some homeowners use more water to maintain their yards than they use for all other
purposes combined.
-> It has no effect over criticism.

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
15 Feb 2012
Posted:
109 messages
Followed by:
2 members
Upvotes:
8
Post
gauraku wrote:
Brochure: Help conserve our city’s water supply. By converting the landscaping in your yard to a water-conserving landscape, you can greatly reduce your outdoor water use. A
water-conserving landscape is natural and attractive, and it also saves you money.

Criticism: For most people with yards, the savings from converting to a water-conserving
landscape cannot justify the expense of new landscaping, since typically the conversion
would save less than twenty dollars on a homeowner’s yearly water bills.

Which of the following, if true, provides the best basis for a rebuttal of the
criticism?
A. Even homeowners whose yards do not have water-conserving landscapes can conserve
water by installing water-saving devices in their homes.
B. A conventional landscape generally requires a much greater expenditure on fertilizer and
herbicide than does a water-conserving landscape.
C. A significant proportion of the residents of the city live in buildings that do not have yards.
D. It costs no more to put in water-conserving landscaping than it does to put in conventional
landscaping.
E. Some homeowners use more water to maintain their yards than they use for all other
purposes combined.
A. Even homeowners whose yards do not have water-conserving landscapes can conserve
water by installing water-saving devices in their homes. - Out of scope as there is no mention about whether other water saving device is more cost effective
B. A conventional landscape generally requires a much greater expenditure on fertilizer and
herbicide than does a water-conserving landscape. - Provide evidence that converting to water saving landscape can save money in many other ways. Hence, it is cost efficient
C. A significant proportion of the residents of the city live in buildings that do not have yards. - Out of scope since the topic of discussion here is cost
D. It costs no more to put in water-conserving landscaping than it does to put in conventional
landscaping. - We are not comparing the cost of conventional vs water converting landscape. Point of discussion is whether it is cost efficient or not
E. Some homeowners use more water to maintain their yards than they use for all other
purposes combined.- Even if some home owners use more water in their yards the system will still save water. View this as relative statement. They will use relatively less water than they originally might have used

IMO : B

_________________
Ankita

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
09 Mar 2012
Posted:
21 messages
Post
Thanks Everyone.. I was right Wink

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
20 Apr 2012
Posted:
44 messages
Post
My choice is also B.

The criticism says that it might be difficult to justify conversion from the old to the new landscaping because the savings in only $20 on water bills. However B clearly rebuts it by stating that the saving comes from not only in water but in the form of money spent on fertilizers and herbicide as well which the criticism completely missed.
Choice E talks about money spent on other purposes but there is not mention of other purposes that water is used for in the test cases. Further even the water used after conservation might still be more than the water needed for all other purposes even if it is less than the water needed for the older non-conservative lawns

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts Default Avatar
Joined
07 Dec 2011
Posted:
8 messages
Post
gauraku wrote:
Brochure: Help conserve our city’s water supply. By converting the landscaping in your
yard to a water-conserving landscape, you can greatly reduce your outdoor water use. A
water-conserving landscape is natural and attractive, and it also saves you money.

Criticism: For most people with yards, the savings from converting to a water-conserving
landscape cannot justify the expense of new landscaping, since typically the conversion
would save less than twenty dollars on a homeowner’s yearly water bills.

Which of the following, if true, provides the best basis for a rebuttal of the
criticism?

A. Even homeowners whose yards do not have water-conserving landscapes can conserve
water by installing water-saving devices in their homes.

B. A conventional landscape generally requires a much greater expenditure on fertilizer and
herbicide than does a water-conserving landscape.

C. A significant proportion of the residents of the city live in buildings that do not have yards.

D. It costs no more to put in water-conserving landscaping than it does to put in conventional
landscaping.

E. Some homeowners use more water to maintain their yards than they use for all other
purposes combined.

My answer is B. Can anyone please confirm.
Hi,

argument : Cost > Savings and cites an evidence that savings is through only one single evenue
For Rebuttal ; we will have to find an option that shows Savings is greater ie there are other avenues from which savings can come


B correctly points out : More Savings = From Water + from fertlisers/herbicide

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
  • The Princeton Review
    FREE GMAT Exam
    Know how you'd score today for $0

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    The Princeton Review
  • Magoosh
    Magoosh
    Study with Magoosh GMAT prep

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Magoosh
  • Economist Test Prep
    Free Trial & Practice Exam
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Economist Test Prep
  • Target Test Prep
    5-Day Free Trial
    5-day free, full-access trial TTP Quant

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Target Test Prep
  • e-gmat Exclusive Offer
    Get 300+ Practice Questions
    25 Video lessons and 6 Webinars for FREE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    e-gmat Exclusive Offer
  • Kaplan Test Prep
    Free Practice Test & Review
    How would you score if you took the GMAT

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Kaplan Test Prep
  • Varsity Tutors
    Award-winning private GMAT tutoring
    Register now and save up to $200

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Varsity Tutors
  • EMPOWERgmat Slider
    1 Hour Free
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    EMPOWERgmat Slider
  • Veritas Prep
    Free Veritas GMAT Class
    Experience Lesson 1 Live Free

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Veritas Prep
  • PrepScholar GMAT
    5 Day FREE Trial
    Study Smarter, Not Harder

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    PrepScholar GMAT

Top First Responders*

1 Ian Stewart 41 first replies
2 Brent@GMATPrepNow 36 first replies
3 Scott@TargetTestPrep 33 first replies
4 Jay@ManhattanReview 30 first replies
5 GMATGuruNY 23 first replies
* Only counts replies to topics started in last 30 days
See More Top Beat The GMAT Members

Most Active Experts

1 image description Scott@TargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep

159 posts
2 image description Max@Math Revolution

Math Revolution

91 posts
3 image description Brent@GMATPrepNow

GMAT Prep Now Teacher

56 posts
4 image description Ian Stewart

GMATiX Teacher

50 posts
5 image description GMATGuruNY

The Princeton Review Teacher

35 posts
See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts