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

Redeem

lignins- Weaken

Expert replies
by kanha81 » Fri May 29, 2009 10:37 am
A new technique for extracting residues of oil from existing oil wells by using lignins, a by-product of papermaking, is profitable provided that oil prices are over 20 dollars a barrel. Since oil prices are rising, investors looking for companies with prospects for rapid growth in profits would be wise to invest in paper manufacturers, whose currently almost worthless by-product will soon be a profit-boosting commodity.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?

(A) A small quantity of lignins are currently sold by paper manufacturers to chemical companies, but most of the lignins produced are burnt as waste.

(B) The 20-dollar-a-barrel oil price as a threshold of profitability for using lignins allows for the increased cost of refining crude oil that has been extracted using lignins

(C) Only one-half to two-thirds of the total oil in a well can be extracted using conventional techniques of pumping and flooding with water.

(D) Petroleum-based substances that can be used as a substitute for lignins in extracting oil are costly and are made from oil, and these substances therefore increase in price as oil increases in price.

(E) The quantity of lignins produced annually in the manufacture of paper is several times larger than the amount that is likely to be useful in the oil industry.

torn between [spoiler][/spoiler] and [spoiler][E][/spoiler]

Isn't excess lignins good? It can be even exported!!
Want to Beat GMAT.
Always do what you're afraid to do. Whoooop GMAT
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by scoobydooby » Fri May 29, 2009 10:52 am
to weaken the conclusion that it would be wise to invest in the paper manufacturers

B. doesnt weaken the conclusion. the threshold of profitability allows for increased costs, which is not a bad thing and doesnt make invesment in paper manufacturers an unwise decision

E. correct. only a small propotion of the worthless byproduct will be useful. so the investment is not a wise decision. the legnins not used in oil refining are worthless- we cant assume that they can be profitably exported.
Join the discussion

by mbadrew » Fri May 29, 2009 11:22 am
E is the right answer.

Think about supply and demand. If there's excess of ligin, more than what oil companies need, then it'll be hard for paper manufacturers to sell at a high price. Therefore, it weakens the arguement. It'll be worthless to invest in paper manufacturing because ligin will not be sold at a high price due to excess availability.

B--This doesn't really weaken the arguement. If you're making $20 per barrel using Ligin, then chances are you'll make less if the price for ligin goes up. You'll end up making less. This choice doesn't present a clear counter premise that'll weaken the arguement.
Join the discussion

by PAB2706 » Fri May 29, 2009 9:11 pm
yep..Even i think it is E

exporting??? you are falling in common trap.....you are over thinking....stick to the argument.


:)
Join the discussion

by aj5105 » Sat May 30, 2009 2:59 am
(E) absolutely ridicules the need to invest in paper companies.

What would be the need when we already have lignins in excess?
Join the discussion

by kanha81 » Sat May 30, 2009 5:48 am
thank you for the explanations! makes sense. OA [spoiler][E][/spoiler]
Want to Beat GMAT.
Always do what you're afraid to do. Whoooop GMAT
Join the discussion

Re: lignins- Weaken

by amazonviper » Thu Jun 04, 2009 9:09 am
kanha81 wrote:A new technique for extracting residues of oil from existing oil wells by using lignins, a by-product of papermaking, is profitable provided that oil prices are over 20 dollars a barrel. Since oil prices are rising, investors looking for companies with prospects for rapid growth in profits would be wise to invest in paper manufacturers, whose currently almost worthless by-product will soon be a profit-boosting commodity.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?

(A) A small quantity of lignins are currently sold by paper manufacturers to chemical companies, but most of the lignins produced are burnt as waste.

(B) The 20-dollar-a-barrel oil price as a threshold of profitability for using lignins allows for the increased cost of refining crude oil that has been extracted using lignins

(C) Only one-half to two-thirds of the total oil in a well can be extracted using conventional techniques of pumping and flooding with water.

(D) Petroleum-based substances that can be used as a substitute for lignins in extracting oil are costly and are made from oil, and these substances therefore increase in price as oil increases in price.

(E) The quantity of lignins produced annually in the manufacture of paper is several times larger than the amount that is likely to be useful in the oil industry.

torn between [spoiler][/spoiler] and [spoiler][E][/spoiler]

Isn't excess lignins good? It can be even exported!!


IMO E. B just justifies why the oil price should be above 20$.
Join the discussion

by nicolette » Sun May 15, 2016 2:28 pm
It seems to me that the right answer is E
Join the discussion

by adkikani » Fri Oct 12, 2018 8:08 pm
@fskilnik@GMATH @GMATGuruNY

I am unable to understand reasoning behind this argument and PoE.
Please help
Join the discussion