Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 1612:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
You’re first to know: Save $200 on GMAT prep starting tomorrow, 4/13. Get 6 official practice tests and study with real questions. Be ready to save!
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
26 Dec 2025, 08:33
Kudos
Bookmarks
Premise given is : In Norvia, having market-driven prices - lower energy use despite rising incomes. In Estera, having subsidized energy has higher energy use. Analysts suggest that Norvians respond more to price signals, while subsidies in Estera may discourage conservation
Conclusion for me is household energy use patterns differ because of pricing structures and subsidies.
The possible inference will be which is closest to saying that pricing structures may play a significant role in shaping household responses to energy costs
Evaluating options
A. The contrasting energy consumption patterns in Norvia and Estera suggest that pricing structures may play a significant role in shaping household responses to energy costs.
Seems correct. Aligns with premise
B. Despite rising incomes in Norvia, energy consumption per capita has declined, indicating that economic growth alone does not necessarily lead to increased energy use. Not Correct. Not the most reasonable overall inference. It only focuses on Norvia and ignores the contrast
C. If Norvia were to implement residential energy subsidies similar to Estera’s, energy consumption would likely return to pre-decline levels. Seems incorrect
Unsupported and hypothetical, prediction not justified by premise.
D. Estera’s increase in household energy use cannot be attributed to factors other than its subsidy policy. Seems Incoorect.
This is way too extreme as per me; passage never rules out other factors.
E. While energy pricing appears to influence household consumption patterns, it may not be the sole factor driving differences in energy use between Norvia and Estera. Seems incorrect
Speculative. Introduces ideas not in the passage.
Hence answer should be A.
Conclusion for me is household energy use patterns differ because of pricing structures and subsidies.
The possible inference will be which is closest to saying that pricing structures may play a significant role in shaping household responses to energy costs
Evaluating options
A. The contrasting energy consumption patterns in Norvia and Estera suggest that pricing structures may play a significant role in shaping household responses to energy costs.
Seems correct. Aligns with premise
B. Despite rising incomes in Norvia, energy consumption per capita has declined, indicating that economic growth alone does not necessarily lead to increased energy use. Not Correct. Not the most reasonable overall inference. It only focuses on Norvia and ignores the contrast
C. If Norvia were to implement residential energy subsidies similar to Estera’s, energy consumption would likely return to pre-decline levels. Seems incorrect
Unsupported and hypothetical, prediction not justified by premise.
D. Estera’s increase in household energy use cannot be attributed to factors other than its subsidy policy. Seems Incoorect.
This is way too extreme as per me; passage never rules out other factors.
E. While energy pricing appears to influence household consumption patterns, it may not be the sole factor driving differences in energy use between Norvia and Estera. Seems incorrect
Speculative. Introduces ideas not in the passage.
Hence answer should be A.
Bunuel
26 Dec 2025, 08:43
Kudos
Bookmarks
Context:
Norvia : market driven, lightly regulated energy prices, household energy use decreased over a decade despite increasing incomes.
Estera : heavily subsidized residential energy, household energy use increased.
Analyst suggests price signals encourage conservation, while subsidies discourage it
We can infer a relationship between pricing and energy consumption behaviour but not exclusive causation or prediction.
Evaluating options:
A) This can be inferred. We are safe to use "may" and "suggest" as they indicate possible correlation. This supports the relationship implied in the argument
B) We are not sure about per capital consumption and the economic growth. This is not stated or implied.
C) This is a prediction. We do not have enough information to say this
D) This states that the price is the only factor that drives consumption. We only know that there is correlation. This is too far to state
E) This can be true, but need not be. This introduces the idea of other factors which matters in deciding the consumption. But this is not implied in the argument.
Norvia : market driven, lightly regulated energy prices, household energy use decreased over a decade despite increasing incomes.
Estera : heavily subsidized residential energy, household energy use increased.
Analyst suggests price signals encourage conservation, while subsidies discourage it
We can infer a relationship between pricing and energy consumption behaviour but not exclusive causation or prediction.
Evaluating options:
A) This can be inferred. We are safe to use "may" and "suggest" as they indicate possible correlation. This supports the relationship implied in the argument
B) We are not sure about per capital consumption and the economic growth. This is not stated or implied.
C) This is a prediction. We do not have enough information to say this
D) This states that the price is the only factor that drives consumption. We only know that there is correlation. This is too far to state
E) This can be true, but need not be. This introduces the idea of other factors which matters in deciding the consumption. But this is not implied in the argument.
Bunuel
26 Dec 2025, 08:43
Kudos
Bookmarks
A -> Correct. The passage suggests that the differences between the way people behave is significantly related to the way energy is priced for the residents.
B -> Per capita cannot be judged by the passage hence this cannot be inferred.
C -> No basis for this statement can be derived from the passage as it is speculative
D -> No other factors have been mentioned but the passage conclusion says "it may have" hence it does not state this option
E -> This is similar to A but this talks about other factors that are not mentioned in the passage and hence would stand weaker to Option A
Option A
B -> Per capita cannot be judged by the passage hence this cannot be inferred.
C -> No basis for this statement can be derived from the passage as it is speculative
D -> No other factors have been mentioned but the passage conclusion says "it may have" hence it does not state this option
E -> This is similar to A but this talks about other factors that are not mentioned in the passage and hence would stand weaker to Option A
Option A
Bunuel
