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

It is currently 29 Aug 2014, 22:25

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

Technological improvements and reduced equipment costs have

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Posts: 360
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Technological improvements and reduced equipment costs have [#permalink] New post 15 Apr 2007, 22:58
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Technological improvements and reduced equipment
costs have made converting solar energy directly into
electricity far more cost-efficient in the last decade.
However, the threshold of economic viability for
solar power (that is, the price per barrel to which oil
would have to rise in order for new solar power
plants to be more economical than new oil-fired
power plants) is unchanged at thirty-five dollars.

Which of the following, if true, does most to help
explain why the increased cost-efficiency of solar
power has not decreased its threshold of economic
viability?
(A) The cost of oil has fallen dramatically.
(B) The reduction in the cost of solar-power
equipment has occurred despite increased raw
material costs for that equipment.
(C) Technological changes have increased the
efficiency of oil-fired power plants.
(D) Most electricity is generated by coal-fired or
nuclear, rather than oil-fired, power plants.
(E) When the price of oil increases, reserves of oil
not previously worth exploiting become
economically viable.

The OA is C but can't A be the answer too? :?
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 15 Jun 2006
Posts: 1124
Schools: Chicago Booth
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR - solar energy [#permalink] New post 15 Apr 2007, 23:19
ricokevin wrote:
Technological improvements and reduced equipment
costs have made converting solar energy directly into
electricity far more cost-efficient in the last decade.
However, the threshold of economic viability for
solar power (that is, the price per barrel to which oil
would have to rise in order for new solar power
plants to be more economical than new oil-fired
power plants) is unchanged at thirty-five dollars.

Which of the following, if true, does most to help
explain why the increased cost-efficiency of solar
power has not decreased its threshold of economic
viability?
(A) The cost of oil has fallen dramatically.
(B) The reduction in the cost of solar-power
equipment has occurred despite increased raw
material costs for that equipment.
(C) Technological changes have increased the
efficiency of oil-fired power plants.
(D) Most electricity is generated by coal-fired or
nuclear, rather than oil-fired, power plants.
(E) When the price of oil increases, reserves of oil
not previously worth exploiting become
economically viable.

The OA is C but can't A be the answer too? :?


C it is. A is not a correct answer, since the threshold of economic viability does not depend on a current oil price but on the comparison of the efficiency of solar powered plants and oil powered plants
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 327
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR - solar energy [#permalink] New post 15 Apr 2007, 23:59
ricokevin wrote:
Technological improvements and reduced equipment
costs have made converting solar energy directly into
electricity far more cost-efficient in the last decade.
However, the threshold of economic viability for
solar power (that is, the price per barrel to which oil
would have to rise in order for new solar power
plants to be more economical than new oil-fired
power plants) is unchanged at thirty-five dollars.

Which of the following, if true, does most to help
explain why the increased cost-efficiency of solar
power has not decreased its threshold of economic
viability?
(A) The cost of oil has fallen dramatically.
(B) The reduction in the cost of solar-power
equipment has occurred despite increased raw
material costs for that equipment.
(C) Technological changes have increased the
efficiency of oil-fired power plants.
(D) Most electricity is generated by coal-fired or
nuclear, rather than oil-fired, power plants.
(E) When the price of oil increases, reserves of oil
not previously worth exploiting become
economically viable.

The OA is C but can't A be the answer too? :?


Well at frist i thought its A but after having analyizing the question very closely I think its C. because the cost of solar power has reduced and the economical viability remains constant at $35. So that means i.e the price of the oil has fallen in the same proportion as the price of the solar equipments or the efficiency of the oil-fired power plants has increased. Now A says that the price of oil has fallen dramatically so thats not correct . so cross A and tick C which is now logically the correct answere
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2005
Posts: 1133
Location: India
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 1

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 16 Apr 2007, 19:44
C for me.

What we really need to hold on to from the question is that "the threshold of economic viability for solar power is unchanged at thirty-five dollars."
Now it says that the price per barrel of oil will have to rise beyond a certain level to make the Solar power plants viable.

This could have been because of increased demand of oil while the supply was constant. But D says that the efficiency of the oil plants has also increased, thereby increasing production from the same amount of inputs. This in turn keeps the price of oil from spiralling up as the demand from the Oil plants remains more or less the same.
_________________

Trying hard to conquer Quant.

VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2005
Posts: 1133
Location: India
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 1

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 16 Apr 2007, 19:47
A cannot be the answer since the fact that "the threshold of economic viability for solar power is unchanged at thirty-five dollars" has to hold true.
If we say that the price of oil has fallen dramatically, this would lead to a change in the economic viability of solar power plants (further reduce in this case).
_________________

Trying hard to conquer Quant.

VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1474
Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 95 [0], given: 13

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 17 Apr 2007, 06:53
buzzgaurav wrote:
C for me.

What we really need to hold on to from the question is that "the threshold of economic viability for solar power is unchanged at thirty-five dollars."
Now it says that the price per barrel of oil will have to rise beyond a certain level to make the Solar power plants viable.

This could have been because of increased demand of oil while the supply was constant. But D says that the efficiency of the oil plants has also increased, thereby increasing production from the same amount of inputs. This in turn keeps the price of oil from spiralling up as the demand from the Oil plants remains more or less the same.


COOL!!
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1377
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 173 [0], given: 10

GMAT Tests User Reviews Badge
Re: CR - solar energy [#permalink] New post 17 Apr 2007, 18:49
ricokevin wrote:
Technological improvements and reduced equipment
costs have made converting solar energy directly into
electricity far more cost-efficient in the last decade.
However, the threshold of economic viability for
solar power (that is, the price per barrel to which oil
would have to rise in order for new solar power
plants to be more economical than new oil-fired
power plants) is unchanged at thirty-five dollars.

Which of the following, if true, does most to help
explain why the increased cost-efficiency of solar
power has not decreased its threshold of economic
viability?
(A) The cost of oil has fallen dramatically.
(B) The reduction in the cost of solar-power
equipment has occurred despite increased raw
material costs for that equipment.
(C) Technological changes have increased the
efficiency of oil-fired power plants.
(D) Most electricity is generated by coal-fired or
nuclear, rather than oil-fired, power plants.
(E) When the price of oil increases, reserves of oil
not previously worth exploiting become
economically viable.

The OA is C but can't A be the answer too? :?


C
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 Mar 2007
Posts: 177
Followers: 0

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

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 19 Apr 2007, 10:27
A and C seem close but C is better
  [#permalink] 19 Apr 2007, 10:27
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 Technological improvements and reduced equipment costs have uzonwagba 13 24 Jul 2009, 12:43
Technological improvements and reduced equipment costs have reply2spg 7 15 Feb 2009, 21:08
3 Technological improvements and reduced equipment costs have lexis 15 08 May 2008, 11:34
Technological improvements and reduced equipment costs have JCLEONES 2 06 Mar 2008, 09:21
Technological improvements and reduced equipment costs have kimmyg 6 13 Sep 2005, 04:33
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Technological improvements and reduced equipment costs have

  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®.