GMATNinja wrote:
From this, the author concludes that "no less plastic refuse per container is produced when [partially biodegradable containers] are discarded than when comparable nonbiodegradable containers are discarded."
In other words, these partially biodegradable containers are
just as bad, if not WORSE than the regular, nonbiodegradable containers.
That's weird -- surely if a container can partially degrade, then it should leave behind LESS refuse than a regular container? Not according to the author.
The correct answer choice will strengthen the author's argument that the partially biodegradable containers are just as bad/worse than the regular containers.
Here's (B):
Quote:
(B) The partially biodegradable plastic beverage containers are made with more plastic than comparable nonbiodegradable ones in order to compensate for the weakening effect of the bonding agents.
(B) tells us that there's a problem with the partially biodegradable containers. The bonding agents holding the bits of plastic together have a "weakening effect" on the container.
To compensate for this effect, the partially biodegradable containers have to be made with MORE plastic than the regular containers. This explains why the partially biodegradable containers leave behind more plastic refuse -- the "small bits of plastic" left behind actually amount to MORE plastic than is left behind by a regular container.
So, (B) strengthens the author's argument.
I hope that helps!
Hi
GMATNinja,
Thank you for providing such a wonderful explanation.
What I understood from your lucid explanation is the following:
If both bio-degradable (B) and non-biodegradable (N) are made from the same amount of plastic, B will leave less waste as it is partially biodegradable.
But the argument says that B leaves same or more waste when compared to N. This is only possible when B is made from more amount of plastic.
However, I have another doubt here. Request to kindly guide on this:
Let’s say that B is made from 110 gram of plastic and leaves a waste of 100 grams. (As it it partially biodegradable)
And N is made from 100 grams of plastic and leaves a waste of 100 grams. (As it is not biodegradable)
Doesn’t this mean that B is better than N, because B is using more plastic but producing less waste.
The flaw in this argument is that we don’t know the breakup of the amount wasted in manufacturing B and the amount that gets partially biodegraded.
Maybe my thinking is tangential to the requirements of the question. Can you please shed some clarity so that I can direct my efforts in the right direction?