Builder: Within ten years, most of the new homes constructed in North America will have steel frameworks rather than wood ones. After all, two-by-fours and two-by-sixes, the sizes of lumber most commonly used in home construction, are deteriorating in quality and increasing in cost, while environment-friendly steel is decreasing in cost. In addition, unlike wood, steel will not warp, rot, or split.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the builder’s reasoning?The builder argues that steel will replace wood because wood is getting worse and more expensive, while steel is becoming cheaper and has practical advantages.
The weak point is that material cost and material quality are not the only factors in construction. If using steel requires very expensive labor training, steel may not become the preferred choice.
(A) Over the next ten years, labor costs in the home construction industry are expected to rise significantly.
Wrong. This affects both wood and steel construction unless we know steel is especially labor-intensive.
(B) Steel-framed homes do not have to be treated with pesticides or other chemicals that can contribute to indoor air pollution.
Wrong. This strengthens the argument by giving another advantage of steel.
(C) Because lumber prices have increased over the last decade, currently most new homes are built with steel frameworks.
Wrong. This strengthens the idea that steel is already replacing wood.
(D) Training home construction workers to work with steel is very costly.
Correct. Even if steel itself becomes cheaper, the total cost of switching to steel could remain high if workers must be trained at great expense. That weakens the prediction that most new homes will soon use
steel frameworks.
(E) The number of houses built each year is expected to decrease over the next decade.
Wrong. This affects the total number of houses, not whether most new homes will use steel rather than wood.
Answer: (D)