Last visit was: 23 Apr 2024, 18:14 It is currently 23 Apr 2024, 18:14

Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Jul 2013
Status:1,750 Q's attempted and counting
Affiliations: University of Florida
Posts: 421
Own Kudos [?]: 2976 [13]
Given Kudos: 630
Location: United States (FL)
GMAT 1: 570 Q42 V28
GMAT 2: 610 Q44 V30
GMAT 3: 600 Q45 V29
GMAT 4: 590 Q35 V35
GPA: 3.45
WE:Accounting (Accounting)
Send PM
Most Helpful Reply
avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 22 Apr 2013
Posts: 76
Own Kudos [?]: 274 [5]
Given Kudos: 32
Location: India
Concentration: Finance
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V33
Send PM
General Discussion
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Posts: 45
Own Kudos [?]: 32 [2]
Given Kudos: 43
Concentration: Human Resources, International Business
GMAT 1: 570 Q44 V25
GPA: 3
Send PM
User avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 07 Jan 2013
Posts: 11
Own Kudos [?]: 8 [0]
Given Kudos: 491
Location: Poland
GRE 1: Q161 V153
GPA: 3.8
Send PM
Re: To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, ... [#permalink]
I do not agree with your analysis about point B, but the rest is okey. Nice
User avatar
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Jul 2013
Status:1,750 Q's attempted and counting
Affiliations: University of Florida
Posts: 421
Own Kudos [?]: 2976 [0]
Given Kudos: 630
Location: United States (FL)
GMAT 1: 570 Q42 V28
GMAT 2: 610 Q44 V30
GMAT 3: 600 Q45 V29
GMAT 4: 590 Q35 V35
GPA: 3.45
WE:Accounting (Accounting)
Send PM
Re: To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, ... [#permalink]
Official Explanation

Answer: E
This is an assumption question. The argument concludes that, as a result of taxes on newly built plants, companies will put more money into developing alternative energy sources. The underlying assumption is that the tax is substantial enough so that developing new technologies is a cheaper alternative to sticking with the newly built plants and paying the taxes. If you identify the assumption, you don't need to analyze each choice, as choice (E) neatly wraps up the link between the two sentences in the passage. (E) is the correct choice.
Board of Directors
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Posts: 2163
Own Kudos [?]: 1180 [0]
Given Kudos: 236
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.92
WE:General Management (Transportation)
Send PM
Re: To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, ... [#permalink]
avohden wrote:
To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, companies built more energy plants that burn
oil, coal, and natural gas. To limit carbon dioxide emissions and encourage the
development of "green" energy, the Ibernian governmental recently imposed a carbon tax
that directly affects the newly built plants. We should therefore expect to see more money
and innovation in the development of alternative energy and a decrease in the country's
reliance on fossil fuels.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) The plants that burn oil, coal, and natural gas can easily be converted so that
they use "green" energy.

(B) The carbon tax will lead to the closure of many of the plants that burn oil, coal,
and natural gas.

(C) Ibernia's energy needs will continue to grow even if the carbon tax results in
higher energy costs.

(D) Ibernia's reliance on fossil fuels is likely to cause the country to fall behind its
neighbors in efforts to develop "green" energy.

(E) The cost of developing alternative energy is less than the cost to existing energy
plants of the government's carbon tax.



GH-06.04.13


this one is straight E.
my pre-thought assumption -> cost of tax will be higher than cost of development. if not, then there is no certainty that the conclusion will hold true.
E exactly specifies this case.
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 08 Jul 2011
Posts: 7
Own Kudos [?]: 9 [0]
Given Kudos: 3
Send PM
Re: To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, ... [#permalink]
mvictor wrote:
avohden wrote:
To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, companies built more energy plants that burn
oil, coal, and natural gas. To limit carbon dioxide emissions and encourage the
development of "green" energy, the Ibernian governmental recently imposed a carbon tax
that directly affects the newly built plants. We should therefore expect to see more money
and innovation in the development of alternative energy and a decrease in the country's
reliance on fossil fuels.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) The plants that burn oil, coal, and natural gas can easily be converted so that
they use "green" energy.

(B) The carbon tax will lead to the closure of many of the plants that burn oil, coal,
and natural gas.

(C) Ibernia's energy needs will continue to grow even if the carbon tax results in
higher energy costs.

(D) Ibernia's reliance on fossil fuels is likely to cause the country to fall behind its
neighbors in efforts to develop "green" energy.

(E) The cost of developing alternative energy is less than the cost to existing energy
plants of the government's carbon tax.



GH-06.04.13


this one is straight E.
my pre-thought assumption -> cost of tax will be higher than cost of development. if not, then there is no certainty that the conclusion will hold true.
E exactly specifies this case.


====
Analyzing

A cannot be taken as we don't know from the passage about amount of effort required to convert to green energy
B is direct , nowhere states that Carbon tax will lead to closure of fossil plants (hence, ruled out)
C Ibernia's energy needs will continue to grow even if the carbon tax results in
higher energy costs. (??, Pre Energy Cost + C.Tax = Total Energy Cost)

Total Energy Cost > Pre Energy Cost ==> Cannot conclude if energy needs from Fossil Fuel will increase .

D Ibernia's reliance on fossil fuels is likely to cause the country to fall behind its
neighbors in efforts to develop "green" energy. ---straight out of context.

E The cost of developing alternative energy is less than the cost to existing energy
plants of the government's carbon tax.

Last paragraph--
We should therefore expect to see more money
and innovation in the development of alternative energy and a decrease in the country's
reliance on fossil fuels.

Possible only when --- option E hold true .
Cost(After Carbon Tax) > Cost (developing Alt. Energy )
Manager
Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2016
Posts: 164
Own Kudos [?]: 85 [0]
Given Kudos: 905
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 620 Q50 V24
GRE 1: Q167 V147
Send PM
Re: To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, ... [#permalink]
Hi all,
My doubt is with option C.
Ibernia's energy needs won't continue to grow even if the carbon tax results in
higher energy costs,there is no need for any of the innovation since the carbon tax isn't applied to the existing plant ..!?
Doesn't this mean that Ibernia no loger need to build additional plants;hence,break down the conclusion of expecting more money and innovation in the development of alternative energy and a decrease....

Anyone please share your thoughts
Thanks
Intern
Intern
Joined: 24 Jun 2013
Posts: 29
Own Kudos [?]: 57 [0]
Given Kudos: 70
Location: India
GRE 1: Q170 V159
Send PM
To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, ... [#permalink]
sleepynut wrote:
Hi all,
My doubt is with option C.
Ibernia's energy needs won't continue to grow even if the carbon tax results in
higher energy costs,there is no need for any of the innovation since the carbon tax isn't applied to the existing plant ..!?
Doesn't this mean that Ibernia no loger need to build additional plants;hence,break down the conclusion of expecting more money and innovation in the development of alternative energy and a decrease....

Anyone please share your thoughts
Thanks


Hi,

The conclusion is that we can expect more money and innovation in alternative energy and can see decrease in reliance on fossil fuels.

As per the premise, the Ibernian governmental recently imposed a carbon tax that directly affects the newly built plants. The plants are already built and will anyways incur tax. For them not to incur tax, they will have to convert them to use alternative energy.

Now, the assumption should be necessarily true for the conclusion to be true. Since you tried to use the Negated technique, as per choice C, when you negate it, it should shatter the conclusion completely. When negated - "Ibernia's energy needs will NOT continue to grow even if the carbon tax results in higher energy costs". In other words, it can either stay the SAME or DECREASE and the existing plants will cater to it. it does not break the conclusion by providing a reason why plants will not spend more money and innovate.

However as per choice E, "The cost of developing alternative energy is less than the cost to existing energy plants of the government's carbon tax." When you negate it, by saying it is NOT less, it means the plants do not have an incentive to convert and hence the conclusion will break. Hence E is the correct answer.


Hope it helps :)
Manager
Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2016
Posts: 164
Own Kudos [?]: 85 [0]
Given Kudos: 905
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 620 Q50 V24
GRE 1: Q167 V147
Send PM
Re: To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, ... [#permalink]
arichinna wrote:
sleepynut wrote:
Hi all,
My doubt is with option C.
Ibernia's energy needs won't continue to grow even if the carbon tax results in
higher energy costs,there is no need for any of the innovation since the carbon tax isn't applied to the existing plant ..!?
Doesn't this mean that Ibernia no loger need to build additional plants;hence,break down the conclusion of expecting more money and innovation in the development of alternative energy and a decrease....

Anyone please share your thoughts
Thanks


Hi,

The conclusion is that we can expect more money and innovation in alternative energy and can see decrease in reliance on fossil fuels.

As per the premise, the Ibernian governmental recently imposed a carbon tax that directly affects the newly built plants. The plants are already built and will anyways incur tax. For them not to incur tax, they will have to convert them to use alternative energy.

Now, the assumption should be necessarily true for the conclusion to be true. Since you tried to use the Negated technique, as per choice C, when you negate it, it should shatter the conclusion completely. When negated - "Ibernia's energy needs will NOT continue to grow even if the carbon tax results in higher energy costs". In other words, it can either stay the SAME or DECREASE and the existing plants will cater to it. it does not break the conclusion by providing a reason why plants will not spend more money and innovate.

However as per choice E, "The cost of developing alternative energy is less than the cost to existing energy plants of the government's carbon tax." When you negate it, by saying it is NOT less, it means the plants do not have an incentive to convert and hence the conclusion will break. Hence E is the correct answer.


Hope it helps :)


Hi
Thanks for your response :-)
But if the existing plants could cater to the need,there is no need to build another.The regulation doesn't apply to the existing plants,hence no need to expect more money and innovation as we are find as is.That's why I think the conclusion break down.

Ps. I think the correct option is fine but just can't eliminate option C :?
Manager
Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2016
Posts: 164
Own Kudos [?]: 85 [0]
Given Kudos: 905
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 620 Q50 V24
GRE 1: Q167 V147
Send PM
Re: To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, ... [#permalink]
Just able to crack my doubt after accidentally run into the same question
Here is a perfect explanation from TommyWallach and Honeyrai :o :o
TommyWallach wrote:
Hey Nverma,

It's a tough question, but the answer is definitely C. You have to stay REALLY close to what's written.

The passage says that the company has concluded it COULD increase profits by OPENING a factory. So the issue isn't whether it is possible to open a factory, but whether IF THE FACTORY WERE OPENED, it would make a profit.

Answer choice A tells us that it will be difficult to open the factory, but that is unrelated to the conclusion. We're only interested in whether or not an OPEN FACTORY would be profitable. There is no need to differentiate between long-term and short-term profits, or between present and future profits. This is about a hypothetical situation in which the factory is open. Only C relates to this.

Hope that helps!


honeyrai wrote:
nifoui wrote:
The answer to the question is C, with this explanation from MGMAT:
In order for Company Y to conclude that it can increase long-term profits by opening a factory in Country X, it must believe that a sustainable market exists for its products in that country. Otherwise, the new factory would not generate revenue and the company could not recoup the cost of the new factory.

What I don't get: how can C be right because the passage states that company Y currently produces goodsfor sale in country X.... so we know that there is a market for comany Y in country X, no?

What am I missing?

Don't miss the word 'sustainable'. Country X is selling its products today means that its products have a market today. That doesn't ensure that the products will have market tomorrow also. It's whole plan is based on long term gains. What use id it of if it opens a factory today & has a market today but 2 years down the line it realizes that its market has ceased to exist.

A & E are lucrative options but out of the scope of the problem.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 06 Oct 2015
Posts: 44
Own Kudos [?]: 6 [0]
Given Kudos: 7
Send PM
Re: To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, ... [#permalink]
I really don't like how E is worded. Makes it seem like the people Running the current plants are the only ones who would be investing in alternative energy (i.e. The cost of the tax is lower to these producers than switching to alt energy.) what about new entrants to the market? You don't need to assume anything about the current energy producers investments if The conclusion only states that more money and investment would flow to alternative energy.

I chose C. If you reverse it and say that they demand for energy goes down, indiviuals will be less likely to invest in alternative energy as there is not as high of a demand for it. Feel that is better than E. not sure this would be near the OG.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 24 Oct 2012
Status:Active
Affiliations: NA
Posts: 190
Own Kudos [?]: 114 [0]
Given Kudos: 59
GMAT 1: 590 Q50 V21
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 3: 730 Q51 V37
GPA: 3.5
Send PM
To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, ... [#permalink]
pafrompa wrote:
I really don't like how E is worded. Makes it seem like the people Running the current plants are the only ones who would be investing in alternative energy (i.e. The cost of the tax is lower to these producers than switching to alt energy.) what about new entrants to the market? You don't need to assume anything about the current energy producers investments if The conclusion only states that more money and investment would flow to alternative energy.

I chose C. If you reverse it and say that they demand for energy goes down, indiviuals will be less likely to invest in alternative energy as there is not as high of a demand for it. Feel that is better than E. not sure this would be near the OG.


Hi,
In GMAT questions you have to accept what is given in the question instead of using your real world knowledge .In this question we have to find the bridge between premise and conclusion.

Premise : To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, companies built more energy plants that burn
oil, coal, and natural gas. To limit carbon dioxide emissions and encourage the
development of "green" energy, the Ibernian governmental recently imposed a carbon tax
that directly affects the newly built plants.

Conclusion : We should therefore expect to see more money
and innovation in the development of alternative energy and a decrease in the country's
reliance on fossil fuels.

The author has concluded on the logic that if government will impose tax , companies will find alternate , environment friendly ways but what if for companies paying tax is cheaper than investing in new technologies then companies will continue with current technology in spite of paying tax and conclusion will fall apart. Therefore option E works as bridge here between premises and conclusion and supports the conclusion.
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 17206
Own Kudos [?]: 848 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, ... [#permalink]
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: To meet growing energy needs in Ibernia, ... [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6917 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne