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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Does GMAT RC seem like an uphill battle? e-GMAT is conducting a free webinar to help you learn reading strategies that can enable you to solve 700+ level RC questions with at least 90% accuracy in less than 10 days. Sat., Oct 19th at 7 am PDT
Affiliations: Volunteer Operation Smile India, Creative Head of College IEEE branch (2009-10), Chief Editor College Magazine (2009), Finance Head College Magazine (2008)
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Posts: 346
Location: India
WE2: Entrepreneur (E-commerce - The Laptop Skin Vault)
During each of the past five years, the total demand for
[#permalink]
Show Tags
09 Oct 2010, 12:21
2
6
00:00
A
B
C
D
E
Difficulty:
75% (hard)
Question Stats:
57% (02:23) correct 43% (02:25) wrong based on 854 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
During each of the past five years, the total demand for paper on the part of manufacturers who produce paper packaging for consumer products has declined. During the same time period, the cubic volume of freshly cut timber that is used to produce paper packaging has also declined. However, reliable reports from recycling facilities across the country indicate that the amount of paper-based packaging material that they provide to paper-packaging companies for reuse has been increasing steadily.
The information provided best supports which of the following conclusions with respect to the last five years?
(A) The amount of packaging using paper from freshly cut trees has decreased. (B) The amount of paper-based packaging that has been recycled for the same uses has exceeded the amount that has not. (C) Recycled paper-based packaging has been used only for new packaging. (D) The total amount of packaging material made of non-paper materials has increased. (E) Consumers have increased the portion of paper products that they recycle after using.
The correct answer is (A). According to the passage, the total paper demand for packaging has been decreasing, while the amount of paper packaging recycled for the same purpose has been increasing. These two facts, considered together, lend strong support to the conclusion that manufacturers have been substituting recycled paper packaging for “fresh” paper to meet their demand for paper packaging.
Narrowed the choices to two -- A and B. Could not make out what option B was about, it was very confusing and probably some new information added as a trap.
Option A wins.
(A) The amount of packaging using paper from freshly cut trees has decreased. (B) The amount of paper-based packaging that has been recycled for the same uses has exceeded the amount that has not. (C) Recycled paper-based packaging has been used only for new packaging. -- [Cannot be determined.] (D) The total amount of packaging material made of non-paper materials has increased. [Cannot be determined since non-paper based materials was not discussed at all.] (E) Consumers have increased the portion of paper products that they recycle after using. [New information not present in the stimulus.] _________________
Support GMAT Club by putting a GMAT Club badge on your blog
My biggest problem for a Must Be True question is trying to understand and remember all the facts from the stimulus. Usually, I have to read the stimulus twice. Then I would read each answer choice and then refer back to the stimulus again to try to prove/disprove it. Can someone suggest how I can do these problems more efficiently? Thanks.
Re: During each of the past five years, the total demand for
[#permalink]
Show Tags
15 Jan 2013, 23:20
During each of the past five years, the total demand for paper on the part of manufacturers who produce paper packaging for consumer products has declined. During the same time period, the cubic volume of freshly cut timber that is used to produce paper packaging has also declined. However, reliable reports from recycling facilities across the country indicate that the amount of paper-based packaging material that they provide to paper-packaging companies for reuse has been increasing steadily.
The information provided best supports which of the following conclusions with respect to the last five years?
(A) The amount of packaging using paper from freshly cut trees has decreased.(Already stated in RED) (B) The amount of paper-based packaging that has been recycled for the same uses has exceeded the amount that has not.(Sounds awkward) (C) Recycled paper-based packaging has been used only for new packaging. Given the argument I think this one is correct.,the argument implies this only as option A is already stated in the argument so cannot be a conclusion. (D) The total amount of packaging material made of non-paper materials has increased. OOS (E) Consumers have increased the portion of paper products that they recycle after using. OOS
Affiliations: Volunteer Operation Smile India, Creative Head of College IEEE branch (2009-10), Chief Editor College Magazine (2009), Finance Head College Magazine (2008)
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Posts: 346
Location: India
WE2: Entrepreneur (E-commerce - The Laptop Skin Vault)
Re: During each of the past five years, the total demand for
[#permalink]
Show Tags
16 Jan 2013, 00:03
targetgmatchotu wrote:
During each of the past five years, the total demand for paper on the part of manufacturers who produce paper packaging for consumer products has declined. During the same time period, the cubic volume of freshly cut timber that is used to produce paper packaging has also declined. However, reliable reports from recycling facilities across the country indicate that the amount of paper-based packaging material that they provide to paper-packaging companies for reuse has been increasing steadily.
The information provided best supports which of the following conclusions with respect to the last five years?
(A) The amount of packaging using paper from freshly cut trees has decreased.(Already stated in RED) (B) The amount of paper-based packaging that has been recycled for the same uses has exceeded the amount that has not.(Sounds awkward) (C) Recycled paper-based packaging has been used only for new packaging. Given the argument I think this one is correct.,the argument implies this only as option A is already stated in the argument so cannot be a conclusion. (D) The total amount of packaging material made of non-paper materials has increased. OOS (E) Consumers have increased the portion of paper products that they recycle after using. OOS
This needs a discussion folks.
Hey targetgmatchotu,
If you take a look at the option that you chose, i.e. Option C the biggest problem you will see in the phrase 'only for new packaging' Recycled paper-based packaging has been used only for new packaging. They don't mention anywhere that all the recycled paper based packaging goes into making new paper-based packagin. They just say that the demand has increased. So in future just be a bit wary of strong words like "only" in the answer.
Only answer A fits since that data is available in the question allowing you to reasonably draw a conclusion that amount of paper-based packing using fresh timber is decreasing since it is stated in the question that " the cubic volume of freshly cut timber that is used to produce paper packaging has also declined".
Re: During each of the past five years, the total demand for
[#permalink]
Show Tags
14 Oct 2013, 17:14
kidchaos wrote:
During each of the past five years, the total demand for paper on the part of manufacturers who produce paper packaging for consumer products has declined. During the same time period, the cubic volume of freshly cut timber that is used to produce paper packaging has also declined. However, reliable reports from recycling facilities across the country indicate that the amount of paper-based packaging material that they provide to paper-packaging companies for reuse has been increasing steadily.
The information provided best supports which of the following conclusions with respect to the last five years?
(A) The amount of packaging using paper from freshly cut trees has decreased. (B) The amount of paper-based packaging that has been recycled for the same uses has exceeded the amount that has not. (C) Recycled paper-based packaging has been used only for new packaging. (D) The total amount of packaging material made of non-paper materials has increased. (E) Consumers have increased the portion of paper products that they recycle after using.
The correct answer is (A). According to the passage, the total paper demand for packaging has been decreasing, while the amount of paper packaging recycled for the same purpose has been increasing. These two facts, considered together, lend strong support to the conclusion that manufacturers have been substituting recycled paper packaging for “fresh” paper to meet their demand for paper packaging.
OA:
Well they have been substituting fresh paper for recycled for starters, but what if the company had stocks/inventory on paper from freshly cut tress? We cannot assume that since there is less timber therefore less in being used in the product of paper right? Or can we?
I think this would be nice to discuss, lets share some knowledge J
Re: During each of the past five years, the total demand for
[#permalink]
Show Tags
10 Aug 2015, 05:37
Hi everyone,
I think that the correct answer is option A.
The decline in the demand for the fresh paper is more or less compensated by the recycling of the paper(stated in the argument) Therefore it can be concluded that the amount of freshly cut timber,which is the source of the paper,is apparently decreasing.
Re: During each of the past five years, the total demand for
[#permalink]
Show Tags
10 Aug 2015, 06:31
Why is option E incorrect?
Option E says that consumers have increased the usage of paper products that they recycle .. implies .. more amount of recycled paper. Does this not imply that the amount of recycled paper is increasing... so the requirement for fresh paper is decreasing?
Re: During each of the past five years, the total demand for
[#permalink]
Show Tags
10 Aug 2015, 06:57
formulaone wrote:
Why is option E incorrect?
Option E says that consumers have increased the usage of paper products that they recycle .. implies .. more amount of recycled paper. Does this not imply that the amount of recycled paper is increasing... so the requirement for fresh paper is decreasing?
Option E-Consumers have increased the portion of paper products that they recycle after using.
Read option E again with particular emphasis on the underlined portion. Where in the argument do are we discussing about recycling by the consumers??
And, infact, if the consumers (= paper packaging industry) themselves start recycling the paper then there will less supply of recyclable paper to the recycling plants and consequently back to the packaging industry.
Even if we leave aside the above explanation, remember that the whole argument is based on amount ( read number) and option E is about portion (= percentage).
On the GMAT, it is rare that an argument that talks about numbers may be answered by percentages. Numbers go with numbers and percentages go with percentages.
Hope I am right and the above helps!
I do not mind Kudos _________________
Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is always to try just one more time.
I hated every minute of training, but I said, 'Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion.-Mohammad Ali
Re: During each of the past five years, the total demand for
[#permalink]
Show Tags
07 Sep 2015, 14:07
samichange wrote:
formulaone wrote:
Why is option E incorrect?
Option E says that consumers have increased the usage of paper products that they recycle .. implies .. more amount of recycled paper. Does this not imply that the amount of recycled paper is increasing... so the requirement for fresh paper is decreasing?
Option E-Consumers have increased the portion of paper products that they recycle after using.
Read option E again with particular emphasis on the underlined portion. Where in the argument do are we discussing about recycling by the consumers??
And, infact, if the consumers (= paper packaging industry) themselves start recycling the paper then there will less supply of recyclable paper to the recycling plants and consequently back to the packaging industry.
Even if we leave aside the above explanation, remember that the whole argument is based on amount ( read number) and option E is about portion (= percentage).
On the GMAT, it is rare that an argument that talks about numbers may be answered by percentages. Numbers go with numbers and percentages go with percentages.
Hope I am right and the above helps!
I do not mind Kudos
Hi Samichange,
During each of the past five years, the total demand for paper on the part of manufacturers who produce paper packaging for consumer products has declined. During the same time period, the cubic volume of freshly cut timber that is used to produce paper packaging has also declined. However, reliable reports from recycling facilities across the country indicate that the amount of paper-based packaging material that they provide to paper-packaging companies for reuse has been increasing steadily.
The information provided best supports which of the following conclusions with respect to the last five years?
(A) The amount of packaging using paper from freshly cut trees has decreased.
I have strange doubt regarding OA As the highlighted text in stimulus states that volume of timber used to produce paper has decreased This does not implies that amount of paper from freshly cut trees has decresed
This is no where mentioned in stimulus , In fact we can assume maybe there be some technological advancement due to which more paper can be produced from less volume of timber etc
So there is no evidence/real proof that amount of packaging produced from freshly cut trees has decreased
On the contrary there is no such mention of "freshly cut trees" in the stimulus so this is new information and this choice needs to be discarded
Re: During each of the past five years, the total demand for
[#permalink]
Show Tags
07 Sep 2015, 14:10
tvrs09 wrote:
Hi everyone,
I think that the correct answer is option A.
The decline in the demand for the fresh paper is more or less compensated by the recycling of the paper(stated in the argument) Therefore it can be concluded that the amount of freshly cut timber,which is the source of the paper,is apparently decreasing.
Hi Tvrs09,
During each of the past five years, the total demand for paper on the part of manufacturers who produce paper packaging for consumer products has declined. During the same time period, the cubic volume of freshly cut timber that is used to produce paper packaging has also declined. However, reliable reports from recycling facilities across the country indicate that the amount of paper-based packaging material that they provide to paper-packaging companies for reuse has been increasing steadily.
The information provided best supports which of the following conclusions with respect to the last five years?
(A) The amount of packaging using paper from freshly cut trees has decreased.
I have strange doubt regarding OA As the highlighted text in stimulus states that volume of timber used to produce paper has decreased This does not implies that amount of paper from freshly cut trees has decresed
This is no where mentioned in stimulus , In fact we can assume maybe there be some technological advancement due to which more paper can be produced from less volume of timber etc
So there is no evidence/real proof that amount of packaging produced from freshly cut trees has decreased
On the contrary there is no such mention of "freshly cut trees" in the stimulus so this is new information and this choice needs to be discarded
Re: During each of the past five years, the total demand for
[#permalink]
Show Tags
14 Sep 2015, 02:10
kidchaos wrote:
During each of the past five years, the total demand for paper on the part of manufacturers who produce paper packaging for consumer products has declined. During the same time period, the cubic volume of freshly cut timber that is used to produce paper packaging has also declined. However, reliable reports from recycling facilities across the country indicate that the amount of paper-based packaging material that they provide to paper-packaging companies for reuse has been increasing steadily.
The information provided best supports which of the following conclusions with respect to the last five years?
(A) The amount of packaging using paper from freshly cut trees has decreased. (B) The amount of paper-based packaging that has been recycled for the same uses has exceeded the amount that has not. (C) Recycled paper-based packaging has been used only for new packaging. (D) The total amount of packaging material made of non-paper materials has increased. (E) Consumers have increased the portion of paper products that they recycle after using.
The correct answer is (A). According to the passage, the total paper demand for packaging has been decreasing, while the amount of paper packaging recycled for the same purpose has been increasing. These two facts, considered together, lend strong support to the conclusion that manufacturers have been substituting recycled paper packaging for “fresh” paper to meet their demand for paper packaging.
OA:
Prephrase: 1. Total Demand(TD) for paper by paper packaging manufacturers(PPM) reduced. [point noted - PPM only for consumer goods] 2. Fresh timber USAGE [the word is not the demand] has been reduced in same period. 3. report from recycling facilities = paper material for reuse to paper packaging companies (PPC) [PPC may be = PPM] has been increased.
Inference = reuse of paper has been increased, fresh timber usage has been decreased.
Choice Analysis: A - it looks perfect B - this choice speaks about usage - we have not provided with different usages of paper based packaging. C - 'Only' is too absolute. D - paper material vs. non paper material for packaging = no information available, out of the scope E - Consumers incremental usage? - nothing of this sort stated. Out of the scope!
Re: During each of the past five years, the total demand for
[#permalink]
Show Tags
30 Jun 2017, 03:36
B,C,D are out of scope. E is not certain. (remember this is an inference question) A is correct because both demands and materials decrease => products decrease
Re: During each of the past five years, the total demand for
[#permalink]
Show Tags
30 Jun 2017, 06:02
Imo A Only A can be concluded logically. B and C require more information to be of use . D is out of scope E Nothing is mentioned in the argument about Consumers.
_________________
close
57% (02:23) correct 
