Last visit was: 25 Apr 2024, 08:13 It is currently 25 Apr 2024, 08:13

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
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 05 Oct 2008
Posts: 160
Own Kudos [?]: 3546 [0]
Given Kudos: 22
Send PM
User avatar
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 271
Own Kudos [?]: 3893 [0]
Given Kudos: 2
Send PM
User avatar
Director
Director
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 696
Own Kudos [?]: 2799 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 05 Oct 2008
Posts: 160
Own Kudos [?]: 3546 [0]
Given Kudos: 22
Send PM
Re: CR-gmatprep [#permalink]
Some more detail and explanations with your answer choice please.
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 4128
Own Kudos [?]: 9243 [1]
Given Kudos: 91
 Q51  V47
Send PM
Re: CR-gmatprep [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
This is a question about averages and about ratios: the average reclamation cost per ton of coal produced is lower now than 20 years ago. So either the average cost of reclamation has gone down, or the tonnage of coal produced has gone up (or both). B might look tempting, but it weakens the argument: it tells us that less coal is produced, which should make the cost per ton go up, not down. The operating costs of running a mine, or the proportion of mines of different types in Balzania, are not relevant here, so A, D and E are out. C should be the answer: if 20 years ago, some mines were very expensive to reclaim, and those mines no longer exist, the average reclamation cost should be lower now than before - take the largest values out of a set and the average will drop.
User avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 24 Jan 2009
Posts: 10
Own Kudos [?]: 2 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: CR-gmatprep [#permalink]
IanStewart wrote:
This is a question about averages and about ratios: the average reclamation cost per ton of coal produced is lower now than 20 years ago. So either the average cost of reclamation has gone down, or the tonnage of coal produced has gone up (or both). B might look tempting, but it weakens the argument: it tells us that less coal is produced, which should make the cost per ton go up, not down. The operating costs of running a mine, or the proportion of mines of different types in Balzania, are not relevant here, so A, D and E are out. C should be the answer: if 20 years ago, some mines were very expensive to reclaim, and those mines no longer exist, the average reclamation cost should be lower now than before - take the largest values out of a set and the average will drop.


Wow, great pick.
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 02 Nov 2008
Posts: 163
Own Kudos [?]: 463 [0]
Given Kudos: 2
Send PM
Re: CR-gmatprep [#permalink]
IanStewart wrote:
This is a question about averages and about ratios: the average reclamation cost per ton of coal produced is lower now than 20 years ago. So either the average cost of reclamation has gone down, or the tonnage of coal produced has gone up (or both). B might look tempting, but it weakens the argument: it tells us that less coal is produced, which should make the cost per ton go up, not down. The operating costs of running a mine, or the proportion of mines of different types in Balzania, are not relevant here, so A, D and E are out. C should be the answer: if 20 years ago, some mines were very expensive to reclaim, and those mines no longer exist, the average reclamation cost should be lower now than before - take the largest values out of a set and the average will drop.


I also chose C
User avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 149
Own Kudos [?]: 296 [0]
Given Kudos: 56
Location: Kolkata
Concentration: Strategic Management
Schools:La Martiniere for Boys
Send PM
Re: CR-gmatprep [#permalink]
IMO C

Focusing on other areas has kead to the reduction. Whats the OA
User avatar
Director
Director
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 696
Own Kudos [?]: 2799 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: CR-gmatprep [#permalink]
This is my take:
Since avg cost per ton has decreased. This is possible if either cost as decreasd or coal mined has increased over 20 yrs. Now E says that coal mined from surface mines has increased over 20 yrs.so avg cost per ton has decreased.
Study can u post the OA now?
study wrote:
Some more detail and explanations with your answer choice please.
User avatar
Director
Director
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 614
Own Kudos [?]: 444 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: CR-gmatprep [#permalink]
Agree with C. If high reclamation cost component is eliminated, the average reclamation cost will come down.
User avatar
Director
Director
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 696
Own Kudos [?]: 2799 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: CR-gmatprep [#permalink]
oops....I didnt pay attention to mountainous area in C which was responsible for high reclamation cost.:(
Yup It sld be C



Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
GMAT Club Bot
Re: CR-gmatprep [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6920 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts

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