GMATPrep Exam 1 Verbal #36 (for me)
Most of the world's supply of uranium currently comes from mines. It is possible to extract uranium from seawater, but the cost of doing so is greater than the price that uranium fetches on the world market. Therefore, until
the cost of extracting uranium from seawater can somehow be reduced, this method of obtaining uranium is unlikely to be commercially viable.
Which of the following would it be most useful to determine in evaluating the argument?
(a) Whether the uranium in deposits on land is rapidly being depleted
(c) Whether there are any technological advances that show promise of reducing the cost of extracting uranium from seawater
Correct answer is (a).
I answered (c) though because I saw that direct link between costs. I would think that the bolded part above would direct lend itself to answer (c). I can see how (a) is possible but (a) seems to already be understood. Why would they be investigating the seawater method unless it was being depleted. Also, commercial viability seems to want a link to costs, and not the amount of remaining resources.
I also fell in the C-trap. And when review it, I found that C definitely irrelevant because C says about technology, not directly about the cost of...But I can not persuade myselft that A. Can somebody help me to figure out A in a more detail?