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.

target of 50%

Expert replies
by chaya009 » Thu Mar 04, 2010 10:42 am
The recycling of municipal solid waste is widely seen as an environmentally preferable alternative to the prevailing practices of incineration and of dumping in landfills. Recycling is profitable, as the
recycling programs already in operation demonstrate. A state legislator proposes that communities should therefore be required to adopt recycling and to reach the target of recycling 50 percent of all solid waste within 5 years.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the advisability of implementing the proposal?

(A) Existing recycling programs have been voluntary, with citizen participation ranging from 30 percent in some communities to 80
percent in others.

(B) Existing recycling programs have been restricted to that 20 percent of solid waste that, when reprocessed, can match processed raw
materials in quality and price.

(C) Existing recycling programs have had recurrent difficulties finding purchasers for their materials usually because of quantities too
small to permit cost-effective pickup and transportation.

(D) Some of the materials that can be recycled are the very materials that, when incinerated, produce the least pollution.

(E) Many of the materials that cannot be recycled are also difficult to incinerate.


OA later
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by gmatmachoman » Thu Mar 04, 2010 10:59 am
IMO D.

But even if its D, I see so many issues with it So I am reserving my explanation.
Join the discussion

by chaya009 » Thu Mar 04, 2010 11:01 am
one more try, gmatmachoman...
Join the discussion

by gmatmachoman » Thu Mar 04, 2010 11:10 am
Its B....

To be profitable, only 20 % is allowed. So now increasing it to 50 %, certainly there will decrement in the quality.

So this would not be a feasible process for processors.
Join the discussion

by chaya009 » Thu Mar 04, 2010 11:16 am
OA is B, but the explanantion was that it is unrealistic to reach the target of 50% if at present it is just 20%.
Join the discussion

by gmatmachoman » Thu Mar 04, 2010 11:25 am
chaya009 wrote:OA is B, but the explanantion was that it is unrealistic to reach the target of 50% if at present it is just 20%.
Ok let me take the cue from OE and give a try.

Author says Recycling program is profitable.Agreed.Is that profitability based on any condition ?? Now this query asks us to "weaken/critisice" the governor's proposal.

B states that maximum allowed percentage of solid waste that can be recycled in 20% ,so that the new recycled product can match the rawmaterial in its quality & price.

So now increasing the "percentage of Recycling waste", we may dilute the quality of the product and also may be adding more cost for processing more waste.

These problems makes the Solid waste processors to criticise the governor's plan.
Join the discussion

by chaya009 » Thu Mar 04, 2010 11:35 am
Got it gmatmachoman, you filled the gaps in the OE.

Thanks a lot.
Join the discussion

by joseph32 » Sun May 15, 2016 11:55 pm
Well I feel B is the answer. I guess I'm right. If some expert could throw light on the reasoning it would be a big help.
Join the discussion