Baumgartner's comparison of the environmental hazards of

Question

Baumgartner's comparison of the environmental hazards of gasoline-powered cars with those of electric cars is misleading. He examines only production of the cars, whereas it is the product's total life cycle-production, use, and recycling-that matters in determining its environmental impact. A typical gasoline-powered car consumes 3 times more resources and produces 15 to 20 times more air pollution than a typical electric car.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion of the argument?

(A) Baumgartner makes a deceptive comparison between the environmental hazards of gasoline powered and electric cars.
(B) The use of a typical gasoline-powered car results in much greater resource depletion than does the use of a typical electric car.
(C) Baumgartner uses inaccurate data in his comparison of the environmental hazards of gasoline-powered and electric cars.
(D) The total life cycle of a product is what matters in assessing its environmental impact.
(E) The production of gasoline-powered cars creates more environmental hazards than does that of electric cars.

crick20002002 · Accepted Answer

Lets dissect the argument.

Statement I:  Baumgartner's comparison of the environmental hazards of gasoline-powered cars VS electric cars is misleading.

Statement II :   He examines only production of the cars, whereas it is the product's total life cycle that matters.

Statement III (example for Statement II) -  A typical gasoline-powered car consumes 3 times more resources and produces 15 to 20 times more air pollution than a typical electric car.

A Simple Therefore test ( Premise , therefore conclusion) or Why Test (Why Conclusion ? Ans = Premise) will help you pick the correct premise and conclusion.

Lets apply it to the problem.

1) Statement I is premise, Statement II is conclusion.

Baumgartner's comparison of the environmental hazards is misleading.  Therefore , He examines only production of the cars,whereas it is the product's total life cycle that matters. -- Does not make any sense. Our selection of Premise - Conclusion is not correct.

2) Statement II is premise, Statement I is conclusion.

Baumgartner examines only production of the cars, whereas it is the product's total life cycle that matters. Therefore, Baumgartner's comparison of the environmental hazards is misleading -- makes perfect sense.

Hence  Statement II is the premise and Statement I is the conclusion.

This means Choice D, though true, is the premise. Choice A is the Conclusion.

MBAhereIcome · Answer

conclusion: Baumgartner's comparison of the environmental hazards of gasoline-powered cars with those of electric cars is misleading.

A is paraphrasing of the conclusion and is the correct option.

OptimusPrimea1 · Answer

+1 the explanation. Now i get it..I have to learn to split arguments into premises and conclusion to improve my accuracy..it makes it more systematic to answer draw conclusions questions..

akashb106 · Answer

(A) Baumgartner makes a deceptive comparison between the
environmental hazards of gasoline powered and
electric cars.----  Exactly what we want. CORRECT. Stated in the first line of the argument.  
(B) The use of a typical
gasoline-powered car results in much greater
resource depletion than does the use of a typical
electric car.----  This is a premise stated in the argument but not the conclusion. The conclusion is that Baumgartner creates a misleading comparison because he does not take into account all the factors.  
(C) Baumgartner uses inaccurate data in his
comparison of the environmental hazards of
gasoline-powered and electric cars.----  INCORRECT, because the data is not inaccurate but just not enough data taken into account by Baumgartner.  
(D) The total life cycle of a product is what matters
in assessing its environmental impact.----  INCORRECT, What about the use, recycling? The answer choice does not mention all the factors that are mentioned in the argument.  
(E) The production of gasoline-powered cars creates
more environmental hazards than does that of
electric cars.----  INCORRECT, because there is no information about environmental hazards. We are only concerned with how Baumgartner comparison is misleading.

EMPOWERgmatAllenT · Answer

Hello all,

Out of respect to the time of those on the forum, questions like this "What is the conclusion of the argument?" do not appear in official GMAT material. This is a question type that you'll see on the LSAT (Law School Admissions Test), but not on the GMAT.

Gmat800Champ · Answer

Baumgartner's comparison does not take all data into consideration. Hence, it is deceptive/misleading.
That is correctly communicated in A.
 (A) Baumgartner makes a deceptive comparison between the environmental hazards of gasoline powered and electric cars.

(D) The total life cycle of a product is what matters in assessing its environmental impact.
  Too General.

disenapati · Answer

But in option D, it total life cycle is mentioned in hyphen which includes recycling also.
why not D ?

Priyanka2018 · Answer

Statement 1- Proper comparison is not done between gasoline-powered cars and electric cars
Statement 2- Because only one aspect is examined there are other factors too such as product's total life cycle-production, use, and recycling(Note all factors matters, may be in combination we don't know that)
Statement 3- comparison of some aspects of electric cars and gasoline cars is done

A- Can be inferred clearly
B- Nothing about depletion is mentioned (May be more electric cars are used and resource depletion because of electric car is more)
C- Data is not inaccurate only other aspects are not taken into consideration
D- Well there are other factors mentioned too, we cannot conclude this.
E- Nothing like this is mentioned in passage

hence A is clear Answer

Harsh2111s · Answer

VeritasKarishma   GMATNinja 
What is the total life cycle of the product ?
I believe it includes production,use,and recycling.
Thus option D is perfectly fine.
Please explain.

KarishmaB · Answer

The conclusion is what the author wants to say - the reason he writes the argument. Why did the author write the argument above? To tell you that Baumgartner makes a deceptive comparison and then goes on to explain why he thinks so (because Baumgartner includes only production but actually all 3 stages should be included).
Option (D) is a premise of the argument. It is true as per the argument but it is not the reason the author wrote the argument.

arjunvai · Answer

vjsharma25

The author mentions at the start

If the 1st line is the premise then can the conclusion (corrrect answer choice) be paraphrasing the premise? Because when I read the correct answer choice it feels like its a re-worded premise.

Also if so, then why isnt answer choice (D) better?

sambitspm · Answer

Premise 1: Baum's comparison is misleading as he only takes the production lifecycle in the evaluation and not the consequences.
Premise 2: Gasoline cars consume 3 times more resources for Production
Premise 3: Gasoline cars produces 15-20 times more air pollution.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion of the argument?

(A) Baumgartner makes a deceptive comparison between the environmental hazards of gasoline powered and electric cars. 
 Well, the word deceptive was the word( misleading  used in the very first premise and proved correct in the following premises. We can keep this option in the bank.

(B) The use of a typical gasoline-powered car results in much greater resource depletion than does the use of a typical electric car. 
 It does, but that's not the conclusion. It is an inference.

(C) Baumgartner uses inaccurate data in his comparison of the environmental hazards of gasoline-powered and electric cars.
 
 We don't know whether the data was inaccurate. We only know that the analysis was inaccurate.

(D) The total life cycle of a product is what matters in assessing its environmental impact. 
 If that's the only thing that matters, then our Premise 2, 3 will be invalid. And maybe the study was right.

(E) The production of gasoline-powered cars creates more environmental hazards than does that of electric cars. 
 Okay, yes this also holds as it reiterates the Premise #3

Now in A and E, A handles all the three 3premises and concludes that the whole study is faulty. While E only handles #3 Premise. So A precedes over E and hence  ANSWER A

sonalchhajed2019 · Answer

VeritasKarishma

What's wrong with Option B.

(A) Baumgartner makes a deceptive comparison between the environmental hazards of gasoline powered and electric cars. - Is A also not the premise ? 
Baumgartner's comparison of the environmental hazards of gasoline-powered cars with those of electric cars is misleading. - This is stated in the first line of the argument. Is A not the paraphrasing of this one. Also, does misleading and deceptive mean the same in this case.

B. The use of a typical gasoline-powered car results in much greater resource depletion than does the use of a typical electric car. - I thought that this is the conclusion we can reach to after analyzing the complete argument.

Please correct me. Is this a GMAT style question?

unraveled · Answer

Baumgartner's comparison of the environmental hazards of gasoline-powered cars with those of electric cars is misleading.  He examines only production of the cars, whereas it is the product's total life cycle-production, use, and recycling-that matters in determining its environmental impact. A typical gasoline-powered car consumes 3 times more resources and produces 15 to 20 times more air pollution than a typical electric car.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion of the argument?

(A) Baumgartner makes a  deceptive  comparison between the environmental hazards of gasoline powered and electric cars. - CORRECT. My only issue is with the word "deceptive". It can be true that it is a deceptive comparison but for that to happen our prior knowledge of the real world - that is of no use in CR - has to be taken into consideration. Without that we don't know whether its deceptive or not - we just know it is a conclusion, what it is actually as per passage we don't know.
(B) The  use  of a typical gasoline-powered car  results in much greater resource depletion than  does the use of a typical electric car. - WRONG. It's like E only. Specific activity concluded which is subjective, however, even after that we figure out this conclusion doesn't help. 
(C) Baumgartner  uses inaccurate data in his comparison  of the environmental hazards of gasoline-powered and electric cars. - WRONG. Can't be right in claiming that inaccurate data was used. May be or may not be the case.
(D) The total life cycle of a product  is what matters in assessing  its environmental impact. - WRONG. Though true but it is misdirected. It leads to nowhere as far as conclusion(highlighted text) is concerned. Even if it is a conclusion, what after this. The passage just lingers on. 
(E) The  production  of gasoline-powered cars  creates more environmental hazards than  does that of electric cars. - WRONG. Specific activity leads to more hazards is subjective and can't be a conclusion for this passage.

Answer A.

Raman109 · Answer

Understanding the argument 
Baumgartner's comparison of the environmental hazards of gasoline-powered cars with those of electric cars is misleading. - Conclusion. 
He examines only production of the cars, whereas it is the product's total life cycle-production, use, and recycling-that matters in determining its environmental impact. - Premise to support the conclusion. 
A typical gasoline-powered car consumes 3 times more resources and produces 15 to 20 times more air pollution than a typical electric car. - Elaborate on the " the product's total life cycle-production, use"

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion of the argument? - We need to find a statement that accurately expresses the conclusion. Mind you this is not inference.

(A) Baumgartner makes a deceptive comparison between the environmental hazards of gasoline-powered and electric cars. - ok. This is what the conclusion of the argument is all about.

(B) The use of a typical gasoline-powered car results in much greater resource depletion than does the use of a typical electric car. - Yes, that's an implication of the premise but not the author's conclusion.

(C) Baumgartner uses inaccurate data in his comparison of the environmental hazards of gasoline-powered and electric cars. - Out of scope.

(D) The total life cycle of a product is what matters in assessing its environmental impact. - Yes that's the premise that the author uses in making his conclusion. Wrong.

(E) The production of gasoline-powered cars creates more environmental hazards than does that of electric cars. - Fact already considered. Wrong.

samarpan.g28 · Answer

(A) Baumgartner makes a deceptive comparison between the environmental hazards of gasoline powered and electric cars. -   of course, the comparison is deceptive (misleading as stated in the argument). 
 (B) The use of a typical gasoline-powered car results in much greater resource depletion than does the use of a typical electric car. -   the natural resources may be depleted due to this, but how does it matter in hazarding the environment? 
 (C) Baumgartner uses inaccurate data in his comparison of the environmental hazards of gasoline-powered and electric cars. -   how do we know the data is inaccurate? Also, this does not align with the conclusion. 
 (D) The total life cycle of a product is what matters in assessing its environmental impact. -   as per the argument, "...use, and recycling-that matters in determining its environmental impact". 
 (E) The production of gasoline-powered cars creates more environmental hazards than does that of electric cars. -   as per the argument, gasoline-powered cars "...produces 15 to 20 times more air pollution than a typical electric car." We cannot say if it causes more environmental hazards too.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Baumgartner's comparison of the environmental hazards of

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Baumgartner's comparison of the environmental hazards of

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards