Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 29 May 2017, 19:09

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# CR Chlorofluorocarbons

Author Message
Director
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 596
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 234 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

04 Mar 2005, 07:04
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Chlorofluorocarbons are the best possible solvents to have in car engines for cleaning the electronic sensors in modern automobile ignition systems. These solvents have contributed significantly to automakersâ€™ ability to meet legally mandated emission standards. Now automakers will have to phase out the use of chlorofluorocarbons at the same time that emission standards are becoming more stringent.
If under the circumstances described above cars continue to meet emission standards, which one of the following is the most strongly supported inference?
(A) As emission standards become more stringent, automakers will increasingly cooperate with each other in the area of emission control.
(B) Car engines will be radically redesigned so as to do away with the need for cleaning the electronic ignition sensors.
(C) There will be a marked shift toward smaller, lighter cars that will have less powerful engines but will use their fuel more efficiently.
(D) The solvents developed to replace chlorofluorocarbons in car engines will be only marginally less effective than the chlorofluorocarbons themselves.
(E) Something other than the cleansers for electronic ignition sensors will make a relatively greater contribution to meeting emission standards than at present.

Plz explain especially B and E?
S
_________________

Regards, S

SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1790
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 101 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

04 Mar 2005, 07:44
I believe (D) and (E) come closer but (E) is better.

(B) we cannot infer this for sure. it is possible that the engine design remains the same and some new solvent will be developed to clean the ignition systems. Since ignition systems are not cleaned that well the auto manufacturers might install additionaldevice to further reduce the pollution.

(E) is the most diplomatic answer I believe. Since folorocarbons are replaced with other cleaners the pollution will increase definitely if nothing is changed. There are two possibilities here.
1 - change the engine design to exclude ignition systems/electronics
2 - introduce another device to purify the exhaust.

These two can contribute towards reducing the pollution level further.
SO somthing other than the cleaning solvents will contribute greater towards reducing pollution levels.
Director
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 596
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 234 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

04 Mar 2005, 07:52
Brilliant anand, so E does include the possibilty of B. Really diplomatic !!
_________________

Regards, S

Intern
Joined: 27 Jun 2004
Posts: 33
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

04 Mar 2005, 07:57
I'd go with E.

Since CFC's need to be phased out to meet stringent controls on emission, the only possiblity for cars to meet emission standards is through some other way. Possibly by implementing what Anand had mentioned or even using an alternate form of fuel that helps cars meet emission standards.
SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1790
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 101 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

04 Mar 2005, 08:00
shankarn wrote:
I'd go with E.

Since CFC's need to be phased out to meet stringent controls on emission, the only possiblity for cars to meet emission standards is through some other way. Possibly by implementing what Anand had mentioned or even using an alternate form of fuel that helps cars meet emission standards.

Good show. that is another perspective.
VP
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 1481
Location: Germany
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 349 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

04 Mar 2005, 08:18
E), because there are other parts beside the Chlorofluorocarbons that are responsible responsible for meeting the standard, but they are less responsible than the Chlorofluorocarbons are. when the Chlorofluorocarbons are phase out the "other" part automatically will be more responsible.
Manager
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 184
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

06 Mar 2005, 04:16
brilliant explanation anandnk.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5045
Location: Singapore
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 376 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

06 Mar 2005, 07:39
(A) As emission standards become more stringent, automakers will increasingly cooperate with each other in the area of emission control.
- Out of scope.

(B) Car engines will be radically redesigned so as to do away with the need for cleaning the electronic ignition sensors.
- Could be the case. But we're not sure if radically redesigned engines could do the job.

(C) There will be a marked shift toward smaller, lighter cars that will have less powerful engines but will use their fuel more efficiently.
- out of scope

(D) The solvents developed to replace chlorofluorocarbons in car engines will be only marginally less effective than the chlorofluorocarbons themselves.
- Absolute no. It has to be more effective or at least equally effective if they are to meet the stringent emission standards.

(E) Something other than the cleansers for electronic ignition sensors will make a relatively greater contribution to meeting emission standards than at present.
- This is true, and there is no 'at the back of the mind possibilities'. The new cleansers have to make a greater contribution if the new emission standards, which are more stringent are to be made.

(E) for me.
Director
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 846
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

06 Mar 2005, 10:33
For inference questions, it is best to choose an option with a mild inference than one which says something ought to happen(that is unless you have two options which are equally mild)

E is a clear winner here (with the use of "Something other than" and "relatively greater contribution")
06 Mar 2005, 10:33
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 cr 13 18 Jun 2008, 12:11
CR: 2 02 May 2008, 23:36
CR 10 06 Oct 2007, 04:52
CR 13 09 Oct 2007, 06:18
CR 17 09 Aug 2007, 20:40
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# CR Chlorofluorocarbons

 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®.