|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Nov 2003
Posts: 361
Location: Illinois
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
CR - GEOLOGISTS' ASSUMPTION ABOUT OIL [#permalink]
 10 Aug 2004, 14:36
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Please explain
Attachments
crimg.jpg [ 58.69 KiB | Viewed 310 times ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1957
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
14
[0], given: 0
|
C is an assumption according to me. The conclusion says that it is enough to meet the need of....so if you negate C the conclusion doesn't hold good
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4441
Followers: 10
Kudos [?]:
81
[0], given: 0
|
Only A and E are contenders but I go with A
A) If it is not possible to recover the oil from those far away regions, how can we say that there is enough oil supply for 500 years?
C) even though oil will NOT be an important energy source in the future, it does not change the fact that there will be enough supply for 500 years
E) Even though there is no new technology that will make oil drilling more feasible, actual technology may be sufficient
_________________
Best Regards,
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 28 Jul 2004
Posts: 196
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 0
|
My choice is A.
I see no choice other than A which provides any proper assumption which supports the conclusion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 1031
Location: Florida
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 0
|
A, my choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 59
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
I messed it up, Went with C and after Paul's explination, it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 258
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
with A
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 345
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 0
|
My vote is for A
The author concludes that the oil needs of the world can be met. Thus, there will be enough oil only if one can have the existing oil + more oil than that exists now. And this will happen only if one can recover oil from unexplored area.
If you know therez oil in an area and you are not able to explore it, it will be of no use. There will be shortage in the future.
_________________
510 on my first GMAT. 610 on second GMAT.!
The struggle continues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Nov 2003
Posts: 361
Location: Illinois
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
The OA is B. But I think that is wrong because the argument already assumes that the future consumption grows at an accelerating rate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 602
Location: San Jose, CA
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
10
[0], given: 0
|
Definitely A
Not sure why OA is B ... doesnt make sense .... what's the source of the Q?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Affiliations: CFA Level 2
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 323
Location: Hanoi
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 0
|
gmatblast wrote: The OA is B. But I think that is wrong because the argument already assumes that the future consumption grows at an accelerating rate.
How shocking???? I hold on with A
_________________
"Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you'r gonna get"
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5134
Location: Singapore
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
87
[0], given: 0
|
another 'stunning' OA. How can (B) be right ? The author already concludes that acceleration of oil consumption is not a big deal and that should not be based on the assumption that rate of consumption staying constant.
(A) is better. Although projections may be right about availability of oil, there is no gaurantee they can be tapped into.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
