|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1963
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
25
[0], given: 0
|
Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth [#permalink]
 04 Jan 2004, 20:33
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
100% (01:35) wrong based on 0 sessions
11. Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth forests for use in manufacture can reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, since when large old trees die in the forest they decompose., releasing their stored carbon dioxide. Harvesting old-growth forests would, moreover, make room for rapidly growing young trees, which absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than do trees in old-growth forests.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the official's argument?
(A) Many old-growth forests are the home of thousands of animal species that would be endangered if the forests were to be destroyed.
(B) Much of the organic matter from old-growth trees, unusable as lumber, is made into products that decompose rapidly.
(C) A young tree contains less than half the amount of carbon dioxide that is stored in an old tree of the same species.
(D) Much of the carbon dioxide present in forests is eventually released when wood and other organic debris found on the forest floor decompose.
(E) It can take many years for the trees of a newly planted forest to reach the size of those found in existing old-growth forests.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4441
Followers: 10
Kudos [?]:
81
[0], given: 0
|
C)
_________________
Best Regards,
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 05 May 2003
Posts: 560
Location: Aus
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
3
[0], given: 0
|
Is it E ??
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4441
Followers: 10
Kudos [?]:
81
[0], given: 0
|
I stand by C because if young trees absorb only half the amount that old trees do, then the amount released by those old trees could not be totally absorbed by younger trees thus resulting in an increase in the amount of carbon dioxide in the air
_________________
Best Regards,
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 05 May 2003
Posts: 560
Location: Aus
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
3
[0], given: 0
|
I thought containing CO2 is different from absorbing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4441
Followers: 10
Kudos [?]:
81
[0], given: 0
|
But if it can only contain less than half the old tree's amount of CO2, then even though it absorbs CO2, it will not be able to absorb the amount released by the old trees...
_________________
Best Regards,
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1963
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
25
[0], given: 0
|
I answer is B. I didnt like any of the answers very much. I ended up choosing A because of the phrase "which of the following if true"
I guess the B says the old trees are usless because most of the organic material is unsuable as lumbar. ( what an assumption ) The testmakers also need to know that trees are used for making paper and not just as lumbar. In that case B falls apart. The organic material might as well serve as wood pulp for making paper. The argument just uses word manufacture. It could mean anything.
Your comments will be appreciated.
Looks like stoolfi, praetorian123, dj are sleeping. stoolfi might avoid me because I press for explainations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CEO
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3550
Followers: 55
Kudos [?]:
626
[0], given: 781
|
Re: CR - Logging Industry [#permalink]
05 Jan 2004, 00:24
anandnk wrote: 11. Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth forests for use in manufacture can reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, since when large old trees die in the forest they decompose., releasing their stored carbon dioxide. Harvesting old-growth forests would, moreover, make room for rapidly growing young trees, which absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than do trees in old-growth forests.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the official's argument?
(A) Many old-growth forests are the home of thousands of animal species that would be endangered if the forests were to be destroyed.
(B) Much of the organic matter from old-growth trees, unusable as lumber, is made into products that decompose rapidly.
(C) A young tree contains less than half the amount of carbon dioxide that is stored in an old tree of the same species.
(D) Much of the carbon dioxide present in forests is eventually released when wood and other organic debris found on the forest floor decompose.
(E) It can take many years for the trees of a newly planted forest to reach the size of those found in existing old-growth forests.
B is best...if the unused lumber is going to decompose anyway..whats the point of cutting the old trees in the first place?
A is out of scope
C supports the argument...if less Carbon is contained in young trees, it supports the cutting of old trees to be replaced by young trees.
D...supports the argument
E..doesnt matter if it takes a year or ten years...its out of scope
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1963
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
25
[0], given: 0
|
It is not unusable lumber. It is unusable as lumbar. I think there is a big difference between these two sentences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
