Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 27 Aug 2014, 00:59

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.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Posts: 318
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 44 [0], given: 1

GMAT ToolKit User GMAT Tests User
Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the [#permalink] New post 30 Jun 2009, 21:06
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
3. Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the environment. This is because the more slowly a car is driven, the more time it spends on the road spewing exhaust into the air and running the risk of colliding with other vehicles.

The argument’s reasoning is flawed because the argument

(A) neglects the fact that some motorists completely ignore speed limits.
(B) Ignore the possibility of benefits from lowering speed limits other than environmental and safety benefits.
(C) Fails to consider that if speed limits are reduced, increased driving times will increase the number of cars on the road at any given time.
(D) Presumes, without providing justification, that total emissions for a given automobile trip are determined primarily by the amount of time the trip takes
(E) Presumes, without providing justification, that drivers run a significant risk of collision only if they spend a lot of time on the road.


The OA is
[Reveal] Spoiler:
d



Please Explain

Last edited by vaivish1723 on 30 Jun 2009, 22:44, edited 1 time in total.
1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 03 Jun 2009
Posts: 805
Location: New Delhi
WE 1: 5.5 yrs in IT
Followers: 62

Kudos [?]: 389 [1] , given: 56

GMAT Tests User
Re: Reducing speed [#permalink] New post 30 Jun 2009, 21:23
1
This post received
KUDOS
I would divide this argument into two separate arguments.
I. Reduced speed -> more time on road -> increased pollution.
II. Reduced speed -> more time on road -> increased chances of collision.

(A) neglects the fact that some motorists completely ignore speed limits. -out of scope
(B) Ignore the possibility of benefits from lowering speed limits other than environmental and safety benefits. -out of scope
(C) Fails to consider that if speed limits are reduced, increased driving times will increase the number of cars on the road at any given time. -Strengthens the IInd part above. Whereas we have been asked to find the flaw in argument
(D) Presumes, without providing justification, that total emissions for a given automobile trip are determined primarily by the amount of time the trip takes -Correct choice. Attacks part I
(E) Presumes, without providing justification, that drivers run a significant risk of collision only if they spend a lot of time on the road. -Incorrect. The use of "only" makes this an extreme option. The author never said that spending more time on road is only reason for increase in collision.
_________________

ISB 2011-12 thread | Ask ISB Alumni @ ThinkISB
All information related to Indian candidates and B-schools | Indian B-schools accepting GMAT scores
Self evaluation for Why MBA?

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 549
WE 1: Investment Banking - 6yrs
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 45 [0], given: 92

GMAT Tests User
Re: Reducing speed [#permalink] New post 01 Jul 2009, 05:47
Weakens the conclusion?
C : Reduced speed > more time on road > increased pollution ; Reduced speed > more time on road > increased chances of collision.

By PoE :
A - Out of Scope
B - Out of Scope
E - extreme word "only"
C - strengthens

D
Re: Reducing speed   [#permalink] 01 Jul 2009, 05:47
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
7 Experts publish their posts in the topic Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the SudiptoGmat 18 16 Feb 2010, 07:31
Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the IrinaOK 4 17 Oct 2007, 17:17
Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the rdg 9 02 Mar 2007, 12:04
Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the rahulraao 5 14 Nov 2005, 04:37
Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the crazyfin 3 28 Sep 2005, 00:56
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.