GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 11 Dec 2019, 14:31

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Chemical-company employee: A conservation group's study of the

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
VP
VP
avatar
V
Joined: 30 Jan 2016
Posts: 1174
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Chemical-company employee: A conservation group's study of the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Sep 2017, 08:55
2
4
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  35% (medium)

Question Stats:

72% (02:07) correct 28% (02:19) wrong based on 291 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Chemical-company employee: A conservation group's study of the pollutants released into the environment by 30 small chemical companies reveals that our company and four other companies together account for 60 percent of the total. Clearly, our company releases more pollutants than most chemical companies similar to us in size.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by tbe employee's argument?

(A) The conservation group that produced the study is not hostile to the chemical industry.
(B) The employee's company does not produce chemicals whose processing naturally produces more pollutants than the chemicals produced by other small chemical companies.
(C) The total pollution produced by all small chemical companies combined is not greatly outweighed by that produced by large chemical companies.
(D) The four other companies mentioned by the employee do not together account for very close to 60 percent of the total pollution by the 30 companies.
(E) There is no significant variation in the quantities of pollutants released by the other 25 small chemical companies.

Source: LSAT

_________________
Non progredi est regredi
Retired Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Long way to go!
Joined: 10 Oct 2016
Posts: 1323
Location: Viet Nam
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Chemical-company employee: A conservation group's study of the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Sep 2017, 08:04
Masshole wrote:
Chemical-company employee: A conservation group's study of the pollutants released into the environment by 30 small chemical companies reveals that our company and four other companies together account for 60 percent of the total. Clearly, our company releases more pollutants than most chemical companies similar to us in size.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by tbe employee's argument?


(A) The conservation group that produced the study is not hostile to the chemical industry.
This choice is irrelevant

(B) The employee's company does not produce chemicals whose processing naturally produces more pollutants than the chemicals produced by other small chemical companies.
This choice could be tricky. We care about the pollutant only. Those chemicals that produce more pollutants are irrelevant.

(C) The total pollution produced by all small chemical companies combined is not greatly outweighed by that produced by large chemical companies.
We don't care about large chemical companies. We care about small chemical companies only.

(D) The four other companies mentioned by the employee do not together account for very close to 60 percent of the total pollution by the 30 companies.
This wordy choice is actually correct. It just tries to say that four other companies don't account for 60% of the total pollution. If those companies account for nearly 60%, the employee's company will account for nearly 0%. Thus, the argument is weakened.

(E) There is no significant variation in the quantities of pollutants released by the other 25 small chemical companies.
We care about the employee's company only. Don't care about 25 other companies.
_________________
Manager
Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 21 Jul 2018
Posts: 177
Location: United States
Concentration: General Management, Social Entrepreneurship
Chemical-company employee: A conservation group's study of the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 May 2019, 15:41
Chemical-company employee: A conservation group's study of the pollutants released into the environment by 30 small chemical companies reveals that our company and four other companies together account for 60 percent of the total. Clearly, our company releases more pollutants than most chemical companies similar to us in size.

Notes
study: 30 chem. co.
us + 4 co. = 60% total pollutants
us release > pollutants than most chem. co.

Analysis
This poorly informed employee has miscalculated…maybe! He argues that his company and 4 others account for 60% of the total pollutants and then goes on to say his company must produce more pollution than most (>50%) of the 29 other companies. He clearly must assume we produce more than 50% of the total pollution?!

Which one of the following is an assumption required by tbe employee's argument?


(A) The conservation group that produced the study is not hostile to the chemical industry.
Their hostility is not relevant to the employees judgement regarding % of pollutant released.

(B) The employee's company does not produce chemicals whose processing naturally produces more pollutants than the chemicals produced by other small chemical companies.
Not relevant.

(C) The total pollution produced by all small chemical companies combined is not greatly outweighed by that produced by large chemical companies.
We only care about small company issues - not the large ones.

(D) The four other companies mentioned by the employee do not together account for very close to 60 percent of the total pollution by the 30 companies.
Aha! Our pre-think is found!

(E) There is no significant variation in the quantities of pollutants released by the other 25 small chemical companies.
OK, but to conclude that his company produces more pollution than MOST….the other 25 companies only account for 40%….and without knowing anything about the breakdown of the 60%, he can’t conclude anything!

Source: LSAT

_________________
.
"What you do in practice determines your level of success. I used to tell my players: You have to give 100% everyday. Whatever you don't give, you can't make it up tomorrow."
Manager
Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 03 Oct 2012
Posts: 159
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Strategy
WE: Brand Management (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: Chemical-company employee: A conservation group's study of the  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 May 2019, 00:17
Conclusion: our company releases more pollutants than most chemical companies similar to us in size.
Fact: study of the pollutants released into the environment by 30 small chemical companies reveals that our company and four other companies together account for 60 percent of the total.
Pre-thinking: is it that 4 other companies do not contribute to let us say 55% and our company only 5% of the 60%?
This is what is mentioned in answer choice D. D is the answer.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Chemical-company employee: A conservation group's study of the   [#permalink] 25 May 2019, 00:17
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Chemical-company employee: A conservation group's study of the

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne