Delta Products Inc. has recently switched at least partly from older

another vote for (B). i just looked at the second part...which is not quite a conclusion. the conclusion is "the new technologies allow Delta Products Inc less fuel to produce same output..." the second highlighted part provides content for the conclusion.

(B) The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second identifies the content of that conclusion.

Look at the second part of the question - "the second identifies the content of that conclusion"

Now question to yourself - Does the second bold faced does that?

Now go back and check for it and you will realize that the second bold faced does identifies what the conclusion is when it says - "The question .....is"

And obviously the first bold faced supports the conclusion as to why Delta moved partly towards electricity

Hope that helps

Why is it D...the second boldface calls the conclusion into question ..The reason I am saying this is because before the second boldaface it says : - " The question has been raised whether i ...... "

I think you meant to ask why the answer is not D.
The most important step in CR questions is 'identifying the conclusion'. What is the conclusion in this argument?
The conclusion is the author's opinion, the point that he/she is trying to make. The conclusion is that Delta's operation causes less fossil fuel to be consumed now.
The second boldface part is only "for a given level of output Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly" which is exactly what the conclusion is. It gives the content of the conclusion.
There are many ways of giving the content of the conclusion. Say the conclusion is 'X'. You can say:
So we can conclude X.
or
Can we conclude X? Yes we can.

A statement that calls the conclusion into question would give an argument that would be against the conclusion.

According to what is given as bold phrases.. I feel the answer must 'B'e B

the second bold phrase just takes content of the overall sentence 'the question is...' and in the next sentence, it is stated that the answer is YES.

So B it is..

was stucked between B and D.
First BF: Fact / Evidence / Support to the conclusion
Second BF: hmm... the word WETHER makes it NEUTRAL, because we don't know the answer yet.
Conclusion: clearly --> YES

(A) The first identifies the content of the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.
(B) The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second identifies the content of that conclusion - CORRECT

(C) The first states the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
(D) The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question. --> to call into question -means smth. negative for the conclusion, but the 2nd BF is not negative (to make a question has not the same impact as call into question on the GMAT , the word wether is neutral
(E)Each provides support for the conclusion of the argument - second BF is neutral - doesn't support the conclusion

There are two versions of questions:

Version : 1

Delta Products Inc. has recently switched at least partly from older technologies using fossil fuels to new technologies powered by electricity.
The question has been raised whether it can be concluded that for a given level of output Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly. The answer, clearly, is yes, since the amount of fossil fuel used to generate the electricity needed to power the new technologies is less than the amount needed to power the older technologies, provided level of output is held constant.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first identifies the content of the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.
(B) The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second identifies the content of that conclusion.
(C) The first states the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
(D) The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
(E) Each provides support for the conclusion of the argument.

Solution:
1st Bold Faced
Delta Products Inc. has recently switched at least partly from older technologies using fossil fuels to new technologies powered by electricity.
This is a fact and it also supports the conclusion.
What is the conclusion:
clearly, is yes (that for a given level of output Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly)
And
2nd Bold Faced
for a given level of output Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly
is part of the full conclusion.
The author infers that Yes, for a given level of output Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly

Now lets do POE:

(A) The first identifies the content of the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.
First is a fact that supports the conclusion but not the "content of the conclusion"

(B) The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second identifies the content of that conclusion.
Correct because of the above reasoning

(C) The first states the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
1st supports the the conclusion and doesn't state the conclusion of the argument
2nd states the conclusion and definitely doesn't calls that conclusion into conclusion

(D) The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
2nd states the conclusion and definitely doesn't calls that conclusion into conclusion

(E) Each provides support for the conclusion of the argument.
2nd states the conclusion, option B) is better than Option E)

Version 2:

Delta Products Inc. has recently switched at least partly from older technologies using fossil fuels to new technologies powered by electricity.
The question has been raised whether it can be concluded that for a given level of output Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly. The answer, clearly, is yes, since the amount of fossil fuel used to generate the electricity needed to power the new technologies is less than the amount needed to power the older technologies, provided level of output is held constant.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first identifies the content of the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.
(B) The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second identifies the content of that conclusion.
(C) The first states the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
(D) The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
(E) Each provides support for the conclusion of the argument.

As the analysis is same for both the version as premise is same, lets do the POE:

(A) The first identifies the content of the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.
First is a fact that supports the conclusion but not the "content of the conclusion"

(B) The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second identifies the content of that conclusion.
2nd BF doesn't identify the content of the conclusion. It supports the conclusion

(C) The first states the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
1st supports the the conclusion and doesn't states the conclusion of the argument
2nd also supports the argument and definitely doesn't calls that conclusion into conclusion

(D) The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
2nd also supports the argument and definitely doesn't calls that conclusion into conclusion

(E) Each provides support for the conclusion of the argument.
Correct as both the statements supports the argument

1. What is meant by identifying the content of conclusion?
2. How is BF1 supporting the conclusion? How is it supporting "The answer, clearly, is yes". It is only a fact that has been stated and which forms the base of the argument. To support a conclusion, we need to have a fact that makes the conclusion more believable. Simply stating that "elta Products Inc. has recently switched at least partly from older technologies using fossil fuels to new technologies powered by electricity." does not make the conclusion more believable that "The answer, clearly, is yes". Else, the question that has been raised in the argument and immediately after BF1 would not have been raised.

Please explain.

First of all, check out this earlier post by mikemcgarry. See if that helps with your first question.

As for your second question, supporting the conclusion does not necessarily imply proving the conclusion. For a given level of output, is Delta's operation now causing less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly? If we have no other information, then we have no evidence either way.

If I then tell you that Delta has recently switched at least partly from older technologies using fossil fuels to new technologies powered by electricity, then this is evidence that Delta has reduced its consumption of fossil fuel. By itself, this does not prove that the conclusion is true, but it still provides support for the conclusion.

I hope that helps!

ChiranjeevSingh

please explain option B

Please check this link https://gmatwithcj.com/critical-reasonin ... st-partly/

VeritasKarishma - Thank you for providing the context. But, could you please explain why can't it be "E"? Since both the statements are providing support to the conclusion?

No, the two boldface statements are not providing support to the conclusion. Premise 1 given above is boldface statement 1 and the content of the conclusion is the boldface statement 2.
Premise 2 is not a boldface statement.

Look at the structure of the argument again.

Delta Products Inc. has recently switched at least partly from older technologies using fossil fuels to new technologies powered by electricity. - Premise 1

The question has been raised whether it can be concluded that for a given level of output Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly. The answer, clearly, is yes, - Conclusion

since the amount of fossil fuel used to generate the electricity needed to power the new technologies is less than the amount needed to power the older technologies, provided level of output is held constant - Premise 2

Isn't the second Bold Face calling the content of the conclusion into question? I understand that the author is in favour of the conclusion, but isn't the specific bold face questioning the success of the conclusion? If so, shouldn't the answer be (D)?

To "call something into question" means to doubt or undermine that thing. The second boldface isn't undermining the conclusion -- it's just stating what the conclusion is actually about.

Exactly as written, the conclusion of this passage is: "The answer, clearly, is yes." This is the main point that the author argues, but it's not particularly useful on its own. In order to understand the author's conclusion, we need to know what the author is actually saying "yes" to!

That "what" is provided in the second boldface. You can reconfigure the conclusion to read: "The answer, clearly, is yes: for a given level of output Delta's operation now causes less fossil fuel to be consumed than it did formerly."

The second boldface contains the details of the author's conclusion, which fits perfectly with (B).

Something that "calls the conclusion into question" would be something that weakens the author's argument. For example, if the passage included information to show that a ton of fossil fuels are used in the new, electricity-powered processes, that might call the author's argument into question.

(D) is out because the second boldface doesn't weaken the author's argument. (B) is the correct answer.

I hope that helps!

GMATNinja Can you help me in understanding how the first BF is supporting the conclusion of the argument. I thought its an in-disputable fact here.

Please help me with this one.

A "fact" can play any number of roles in an argument. For example, consider this argument:

"Every time I eat at In-n-Out Burger, I experience horrible indigestion the next day. I had In-n-Out yesterday, so today is going to be rough."

Here, I've listed two statements of fact:

1) "Every time I eat at In-n-Out Burger, I experience horrible indigestion the next day," and
2) "I had In-n-Out yesterday."

But why did I include these facts in my argument? To support the conclusion that "today is going to be rough."

Similarly, when dealing with BF questions you should ask yourself why the author included a particular piece of the argument. The first BF tells you that Delta has recently switched at least partly from older technologies using fossil fuels to new technologies powered by electricity. Why does the author include this information? It serves as a piece of evidence that Delta has reduced its consumption of fossil fuel. Sure, it doesn't prove that the conclusion must be true -- but it does provide some support.

I hope that helps!