|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 258
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
36
[0], given: 1
|
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air [#permalink]
 12 May 2009, 23:07
Question Stats:
28% (02:28) correct
71% (01:37) wrong based on 12 sessions
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air pollution reached unhealthful amounts and a smog alert was put into effect. In early 1987, new air pollution control measures were enacted, but the city had smog alerts on 31 days that year and on 39 days the following year. In 1989, however, the number of smog alerts in Los Diablos dropped to sixteen. The main air pollutants in Los Diablos are ozone and carbon monoxide, and since 1986 the levels of both have been monitored by gas spectrography. Which of the following statements, assuming that each is true, would be LEAST helpful in explaining the air pollution levels in Los Diablos between 1986 and 1989? (A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988. (B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented. (C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful. (D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures. (E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 842
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
19
[0], given: 0
|
D
if D were true then why is there a decrease in pollutants in 1989, there should have been an increase
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 258
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
36
[0], given: 1
|
bigtreezl wrote: D
if D were true then why is there a decrease in pollutants in 1989, there should have been an increase Yes, but it's not OA I wanna check more posts before deciding whether the OA is wrong..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 28 Aug 2008
Posts: 49
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 0
|
Minheequang wrote: One more doubt about OA
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air pollution reached unhealthful amounts and a smog alert was put into effect. In early 1987, new air pollution control measures were enacted, but the city had smog alerts on 31 days that year and on 39 days the following year. In 1989, however, the number of smog alerts in Los Diablos dropped to sixteen. The main air pollutants in Los Diablos are ozone and carbon monoxide, and since 1986 the levels of both have been monitored by gas spectrography.
Which of the following statements, assuming that each is true, would be LEAST helpful in explaining the air pollution levels in Los Diablos between 1986 and 1989?
(A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988.
(B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented.
(C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful.
(D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures.
(E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area. A) Explains why number reduced on 1988 B) This does not. If more accurate then the numbers should have increased. C) Explains. Now new threshould is there, which maybe greater than the previous one. D) Explains. Since companies exempted from air pollution measures, hence the decrease. E) Since min 2 years required to break down the pollutants, hence the effects seen after 2 years.. IMO B
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Jan 2009
Posts: 338
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
42
[0], given: 5
|
I also selected B initally. but bigtreezl is drawing be to D.
(B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented. (I belive this does not give any explaination for the pollution b/w 1986 to 1989 )
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 258
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
36
[0], given: 1
|
imanonymoususer wrote: Minheequang wrote: One more doubt about OA
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air pollution reached unhealthful amounts and a smog alert was put into effect. In early 1987, new air pollution control measures were enacted, but the city had smog alerts on 31 days that year and on 39 days the following year. In 1989, however, the number of smog alerts in Los Diablos dropped to sixteen. The main air pollutants in Los Diablos are ozone and carbon monoxide, and since 1986 the levels of both have been monitored by gas spectrography.
Which of the following statements, assuming that each is true, would be LEAST helpful in explaining the air pollution levels in Los Diablos between 1986 and 1989?
(A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988.
(B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented.
(C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful.
(D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures.
(E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area. A) Explains why number reduced on 1988 B) This does not. If more accurate then the numbers should have increased. --> From which info can you say that it will increase ? I can assume that because a new monitor machine is more accurate, it will prove less smog alert case which otherwise will prove positive. The initial problem in this case is that the control measures didn't work, but a new spectrometer helps solve the problemC) Explains. Now new threshould is there, which maybe greater than the previous one. D) Explains. Since companies exempted from air pollution measures, hence the decrease. --> I don't think so. A number of companies are exempted from controlled pollution measures, it means that such companies will pose more pollution. So why does the case of smog alert become fewer ? --> it strengthens the discrepancyE) Since min 2 years required to break down the pollutants, hence the effects seen after 2 years.. IMO B
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 1003
Followers: 7
Kudos [?]:
40
[0], given: 5
|
I recall this question and The OA is B apparently, because even though the gas spectometer was invented, it doesn't mean it was used. But I'm still sticking with D! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 842
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
19
[0], given: 0
|
bigfernhead wrote: I recall this question and The OA is B apparently, because even though the gas spectometer was invented, it doesn't mean it was used. But I'm still sticking with D! wow, what a dirty trick! good question though
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 08 Apr 2009
Posts: 106
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 3
|
IMO D too
If some companies are exempted, it is not going to bring pollution levels down
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 258
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
36
[0], given: 1
|
Anyone else ?
There's one more thing that makes D the best answer: "in 1988" --> indefinite time, so I can assume that it happened at the early 1988, affecting the whole year 1988 and 1989, but why the 2 year had 2 different outcome ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 28 Aug 2008
Posts: 49
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 0
|
Minheequang wrote: imanonymoususer wrote: Minheequang wrote: One more doubt about OA
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air pollution reached unhealthful amounts and a smog alert was put into effect. In early 1987, new air pollution control measures were enacted, but the city had smog alerts on 31 days that year and on 39 days the following year. In 1989, however, the number of smog alerts in Los Diablos dropped to sixteen. The main air pollutants in Los Diablos are ozone and carbon monoxide, and since 1986 the levels of both have been monitored by gas spectrography.
Which of the following statements, assuming that each is true, would be LEAST helpful in explaining the air pollution levels in Los Diablos between 1986 and 1989?
(A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988.
(B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented.
(C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful.
(D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures.
(E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area. A) Explains why number reduced on 1988 B) This does not. If more accurate then the numbers should have increased. --> From which info can you say that it will increase ? I can assume that because a new monitor machine is more accurate, it will prove less smog alert case which otherwise will prove positive. The initial problem in this case is that the control measures didn't work, but a new spectrometer helps solve the problemC) Explains. Now new threshould is there, which maybe greater than the previous one. D) Explains. Since companies exempted from air pollution measures, hence the decrease. --> I don't think so. A number of companies are exempted from controlled pollution measures, it means that such companies will pose more pollution. So why does the case of smog alert become fewer ? --> it strengthens the discrepancyE) Since min 2 years required to break down the pollutants, hence the effects seen after 2 years.. IMO B Agreed that introduction of new spectrometer could have also cause less smog alerts. All the more reason why it "LEAST" explains the air pollution levels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 10 May 2009
Posts: 69
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 11
|
what's the final OA?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 258
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
36
[0], given: 1
|
prinits wrote: what's the final OA?! OA is B, which I'm struggling against
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 657
Followers: 7
Kudos [?]:
104
[0], given: 6
|
I am not convinced on B. D is my choice becuase whether the new meter is used is beyond the argument.
_________________
If You're Not Living On The Edge, You're Taking Up Too Much Space
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Posts: 20
Schools: Wake Forest Evening
WE 1: ~12 years total
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 33
|
I still like D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 18 Oct 2009
Posts: 53
Location: Alberta, Canada
Schools: Queen's E-MBA
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
10
[0], given: 7
|
The questions is "what would be LEAST helpful in explaining the air pollution levels" and D is not at all helping in explaining, it is rather helping to weaken the conclusion. I am convienced with B (though didn't ans at) because it is the LEAST likely reason for the decrease.
_________________
Please give KUDOS if you like the post
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 02 Jan 2010
Posts: 18
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 1
|
I agree w/the OA. Just because a new instrument was invented does not mean that it was used to measure pollutant levels in the atmosphere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 180
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
49
[0], given: 5
|
Minheequang wrote: One more doubt about OA In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air pollution reached unhealthful amounts and a smog alert was put into effect. In early 1987, new air pollution control measures were enacted, but the city had smog alerts on 31 days that year and on 39 days the following year. In 1989, however, the number of smog alerts in Los Diablos dropped to sixteen. The main air pollutants in Los Diablos are ozone and carbon monoxide, and since 1986 the levels of both have been monitored by gas spectrography. Which of the following statements, assuming that each is true, would be LEAST helpful in explaining the air pollution levels in Los Diablos between 1986 and 1989? (A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988. (B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented. (C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful. (D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures. (E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area. I too chose D but why can't we think it that way... the question doesn't ask for the reason for decrease in pollution.. it asks which one is least helpful in explaining pollution levels so considering that I think B is correct answer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 14 Aug 2009
Posts: 56
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
12
[0], given: 29
|
This question is very interesting. It is asking for the LEAST helpful answer that supports the assertion not the the answer that weakens the arguement. I must read more carefully. Good question!
_________________
My will shall shape the future. Whether I fail or succeed shall be no man's doing but my own. I am the force; I can clear any obstacle before me or I can be lost in the maze. My choice; my responsibility; win or lose, only I hold the key to my destiny - Elaine Maxwell
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Status: Can't give up
Joined: 20 Dec 2009
Posts: 322
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
20
[0], given: 35
|
A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988.
(B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented.
(C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful.
(D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures. = the mayor accepting money does not contribute much to the air pollution control.(E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Similar topics |
Author |
Replies |
Last post |
|
Similar
Topics:
|
 |
|
|
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air
|
karun_aggarwal |
0 |
09 Apr 2005, 16:07 |
 |
|
|
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air
|
mbamantra |
17 |
26 Apr 2005, 08:31 |
|
|
|
|
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air
|
vc019 |
11 |
07 Nov 2005, 20:02 |
|
|
|
|
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air
|
mahesh004 |
5 |
19 Nov 2005, 10:01 |
|
|
|
|
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air
|
shinewine |
15 |
06 Aug 2006, 09:14 |
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
