It is currently 21 Oct 2017, 18:28

### 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

# For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 86

Kudos [?]: 204 [5], given: 0

For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2008, 19:24
5
KUDOS
24
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

75% (hard)

Question Stats:

52% (01:04) correct 48% (01:16) wrong based on 1763 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito have been damaged by exhaust from the many tour buses that come to the city. There has been little parking space, so most buses have idled at the curb during each stop on their tour, and idling produces as much exhaust as driving. The city has now provided parking that accommodates a third of the tour buses, so damage to Palitito's buildings from the buses' exhaust will diminish significantly.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument?

(A) The exhaust from Palitito's few automobiles is not a significant threat to Palitito's buildings.
(B) Palitito's Renaissance buildings are not threatened by pollution other than engine exhaust.
(C) Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transporting passengers from one site to another.
(D) More tourists come to Palitito by tour bus than by any other single means of transportation.
(E) Some of the tour buses that are unable to find parking drive around Palitito while their passengers are visiting a site.

Official Guide 12 Question

 Question: 32 Page: 38 Difficulty: 600

Find All Official Guide Questions

Video Explanations:
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 204 [5], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 322

Kudos [?]: 386 [3], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2008, 20:26
3
KUDOS
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
IMO between B/C/D. Not sure how to reson among these. IMO C

Good question.

A. out of scope of the passage
E. even if 2/3 that cannot find parking just drive aroudn the city the pollution will increase
C. If the buses are spending only 1/4 of their time transporting tourists and are idiling 3/4 of the time on curbs emitting fumes then this will increase the pollution. However, if they can park in a parking lot and shut off the engines then pollution will at lest be reduced.

Kudos [?]: 386 [3], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 24 Feb 2008
Posts: 41

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2008, 20:40
MamtaKrishnia wrote:
For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito have been damaged by exhaust from the many tour buses that come to the city. There has been little parking space, so most buses have idled at the curb during each stop on their tour, and idling produces as much exhaust as driving. The city has now provided parking that accommodates a third of the tour buses, so damage to Palitito's buildings from the buses' exhaust will diminish significantly.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly support the argument?

a) The exhaust from Palitito's few automobiles is not a significant threat to Palitito's buildings.
b) Palitito's Renaissance buildings are not threatened by pollution other then engine exhaust.
c) Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transporting passengers from one site to another.
d) More tourists come to Palitito by tour bus than by any other single mean of transportation.
e) Some of the tour buses that are unable to find parking drive around Palitito while their passengers are visiting a site.

a) out- as it is weakens the arg
b) out- irrelevant
c) out-talks @ transportation of tourists. The passage talks @ pollution from exhausts and not from no of tourists visiting the place
d) out- again talks @ no of tourists. No has nothing to do with the pollution
e) in- Some buses unable to find parking place,keep moving around the place. This supports the arg that lack of parking space was resulting in more pollution.Also the passage tells that pollution while idling is equivalent to that produced during driving

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 86

Kudos [?]: 204 [3], given: 0

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2008, 23:29
3
KUDOS
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
OA is C.

c) Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transporting passengers from one site to another.

This option states that its only 1/4 th of the time do the tour buses actually transport tourists.
The rest of the 3/4th time they are either idle or looking for parking space.
Therefore is directly strengthens the argument.

Option E on the other hand is close but says SOME which makes it less preferable over option C.

Kudos [?]: 204 [3], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 270

Kudos [?]: 240 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

08 Sep 2010, 04:11
C is winner.
_________________

Trying hard to achieve something unachievable now....

Kudos [?]: 240 [0], given: 2

Manager
Joined: 08 Feb 2010
Posts: 129

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

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2010, 06:19
+1 for C

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

Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2011
Posts: 248

Kudos [?]: 230 [1], given: 20

Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2012, 00:00
1
KUDOS
thangvietnam wrote:
WHY E IS WRONG

the question is to find something supports the argument. in other words, in addition to what is mentioned in the argument, find something ELSE to support the argument.

E is an already mentioned fact but not something new. Hence, answer is C.

On a separate note...
this question is really tricky. argument gave a conclusion (provided parking lot helps reduce the pollution). But no answer choice addresses this; instead they all talk about intermediate statements/conclusion.. Be careful
_________________

-------------------------
-Aravind Chembeti

Kudos [?]: 230 [1], given: 20

Intern
Joined: 17 Jan 2012
Posts: 7

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

### Show Tags

22 Jan 2012, 21:35
Chembeti wrote:
thangvietnam wrote:
WHY E IS WRONG

the question is to find something supports the argument. in other words, in addition to what is mentioned in the argument, find something ELSE to support the argument.

E is an already mentioned fact but not something new. Hence, answer is C.

On a separate note...
this question is really tricky. argument gave a conclusion (provided parking lot helps reduce the pollution). But no answer choice addresses this; instead they all talk about intermediate statements/conclusion.. Be careful

That's correct!

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

Manager
Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Posts: 56

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 18

Re: For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Feb 2012, 22:07
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
MamtaKrishnia wrote:
For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito have been damaged by exhaust from the many tour buses that come to the city. There has been little parking space, so most buses have idled at the curb during each stop on their tour, and idling produces as much exhaust as driving. The city has now provided parking that accommodates a third of the tour buses, so damage to Palitito's buildings from the buses' exhaust will diminish significantly.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument?
(A) The exhaust from Palitito's few automobiles is not a significant threat to Palitito's buildings.
(B) Palitito's Renaissance buildings are not threatened by pollution other than engine exhaust.
(C) Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transporting passengers from one site to another.
(D) More tourists come to Palitito by tour bus than by any other single means of transportation.
(E) Some of the tour buses that are unable to find parking drive around Palitito while their passengers are visiting a site.

I thought it to be B initially but as i write this explanation I could see why it's wrong.... even if buildings are not threatened by pollution other than Palitito's exhaust, then also this comment has no bearing on my conclusion that providing parking for 1/3 buses would reduce pollution and hence damage. It could still be possible that rest 2/3 buses out on road cause major pollution.

A can be crossed out because stimulus specifically talks building damage due to pollution from tour buses.

Again D could be taken out on similar lines .... number of tourist preferring tour buses has no bearing on reducing pollution from tour buses. It could have been a strengthener for a case considering pollution due to tour buses and other means of transportation, but here it does not have any impact on scheme of providing parking to tour bus.

out of C and E .... i feel E to have a much narrower scope as it talks abt some buses tht a unable to find a parking spot.

on the other hand C talks about tour buses in general spending 1/4 time travelling while 3/4 of their time idle, thus providing parking to tour buses would effectively reduce the pollution during curb side parking.

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 18

Manager
Joined: 07 Dec 2011
Posts: 120

Kudos [?]: 549 [6], given: 116

Location: India
GMAT Date: 07-30-2012
GPA: 2.66
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2012, 10:13
6
KUDOS
12
This post was
BOOKMARKED
For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito have been damaged by exhaust from the many tour buses that come to the city. There has been little parking space, so most buses have idled at the curb during each stop on their tour, and idling produces as much exhaust as driving. The city has now provided parking that accommodates a third of the tour buses, so damage to Palitito's buildings from the buses' exhaust will diminish significantly.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument?

(A) The exhaust from Palitito's few automobiles is not a significant threat to Palitito's buildings.
(B) Palitito's Renaissance buildings are not threatened by pollution other than engine exhaust.
(C) Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transporting passengers from one site to another.
(D) More tourists come to Palitito by tour bus than by any other single means of transportation.
(E) Some of the tour buses that are unable to find parking drive around Palitito while their passengers are visiting a site.

Quote:
why is option D a wrong choice.
I am not very satisfied with the OA.
Can somebody help me on throwing some insight on the relevance of OA?

_________________

Kudos [?]: 549 [6], given: 116

Intern
Joined: 22 Jan 2012
Posts: 17

Kudos [?]: 7 [2], given: 2

Re: For years the beautiful Renaissance [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2012, 10:24
2
KUDOS
B/W C and D,

C is addressing the issue directly. I says more than 3 quarters the buses will be in idling state. So, if we provide parking for them, pollution decreases.

D is just telling more tourists use buses but not specific. At the end, we need to choose the best given

Kudos [?]: 7 [2], given: 2

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Sep 2010
Posts: 329

Kudos [?]: 1032 [1], given: 136

Re: For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Aug 2012, 22:35
1
KUDOS
maybeam wrote:

Quote:
why is option D a wrong choice.
I am not very satisfied with the OA.
Can somebody help me on throwing some insight on the relevance of OA?

At first instance, I found the choice D as irrelevant. However, Irrelevant is a mere subjective term. So, let me take shot on this by some other approach.
Option D states that more tourists come by using buses.
Lets say earlier we have 10 buses and 50 people that used to visit the buildings.
but now we have 500 people, and assume that the bus carry capacity remains same, so now we need atleast 100 buses.
So, as per parking - we can park approx 34 buses and 76 buses remain will idle and the exhaust from those buses will damage the buildings more.
So, it can weaken the argument.

Remember, you may have a few choices that behave similar to Dangling modifier. i.e it may weaker or strengthen the choices.
_________________

+1 Kudos me, Help me unlocking GMAT Club Tests

Kudos [?]: 1032 [1], given: 136

CEO
Status: Nothing comes easy: neither do I want.
Joined: 12 Oct 2009
Posts: 2761

Kudos [?]: 1887 [3], given: 235

Location: Malaysia
Concentration: Technology, Entrepreneurship
Schools: ISB '15 (M)
GMAT 1: 670 Q49 V31
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V35
Re: For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Aug 2012, 23:27
3
KUDOS
maybeam wrote:
For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito have been damaged by exhaust from the many tour buses that come 11-rules-for-posting-133935.htmlto the city. There has been little parking space, so most buses have idled at the curb during each stop on their tour, and idling produces as much exhaust as driving. The city has now provided parking that accommodates a third of the tour buses, so damage to Palitito's buildings from the buses' exhaust will diminish significantly.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument?

(A) The exhaust from Palitito's few automobiles is not a significant threat to Palitito's buildings.
(B) Palitito's Renaissance buildings are not threatened by pollution other than engine exhaust.
(C) Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transporting passengers from one site to another.
(D) More tourists come to Palitito by tour bus than by any other single means of transportation.
(E) Some of the tour buses that are unable to find parking drive around Palitito while their passengers are visiting a site.

Quote:
why is option D a wrong choice.
I am not very satisfied with the OA.
Can somebody help me on throwing some insight on the relevance of OA?

Read the red part. We are only concerned of impact of exhaust from the buses. So it does not matter whether m0re comes. The suggestion once implement would cater the same number of buses.

You need to understand how this is out of scope. Spend some time on it.
_________________

Fight for your dreams :For all those who fear from Verbal- lets give it a fight

Money Saved is the Money Earned

Jo Bole So Nihaal , Sat Shri Akaal

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Gmat test review :
http://gmatclub.com/forum/670-to-710-a-long-journey-without-destination-still-happy-141642.html

Kudos [?]: 1887 [3], given: 235

Director
Status: Final Countdown
Joined: 17 Mar 2010
Posts: 536

Kudos [?]: 353 [2], given: 75

Location: India
GPA: 3.82
WE: Account Management (Retail Banking)
Re: For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Aug 2012, 00:04
2
KUDOS
(A) The exhaust from Palitito's few automobiles is not a significant threat to Palitito's buildings.
but the exhaust specially during idling* is causing the damage-incorrect
(B) Palitito's Renaissance buildings are not threatened by pollution other than engine exhaust.
may or may not be in real but here , pollution other than engine exhaust is not under consideration-incorrect
(C) Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transporting passengers from one site to another.
True, because so much time idling can cause enough pollution to damage the buildings-correct
(D) More tourists come to Palitito by tour bus than by any other single means of transportation.
may or may not be in real, but here , any conveyance other than the tour buses is not under consideration-incorrect
(E) Some of the tour buses that are unable to find parking drive around Palitito while their passengers are visiting a site.
they can roam around and park the vehicle to some distance place, and can avoid idling -incorrect

*idling is a state of vehicle when the engine is running but the vehicle is idle and standing , when we see a red light on traffic signal we standby the vehicle without switching off the engine.
_________________

" Make more efforts "
Press Kudos if you liked my post

Kudos [?]: 353 [2], given: 75

Manager
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 79

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 186

Location: United States
Re: For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 May 2013, 10:51
thevenus wrote:
(A) The exhaust from Palitito's few automobiles is not a significant threat to Palitito's buildings.
but the exhaust specially during idling* is causing the damage-incorrect
(B) Palitito's Renaissance buildings are not threatened by pollution other than engine exhaust.
may or may not be in real but here , pollution other than engine exhaust is not under consideration-incorrect
(C) Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transporting passengers from one site to another.
True, because so much time idling can cause enough pollution to damage the buildings-correct
(D) More tourists come to Palitito by tour bus than by any other single means of transportation.
may or may not be in real, but here , any conveyance other than the tour buses is not under consideration-incorrect
(E) Some of the tour buses that are unable to find parking drive around Palitito while their passengers are visiting a site.
they can roam around and park the vehicle to some distance place, and can avoid idling -incorrect

*idling is a state of vehicle when the engine is running but the vehicle is idle and standing , when we see a red light on traffic signal we standby the vehicle without switching off the engine.

Hi ,
Isnt E indicating a similar idea as C?Or is it that we are just concerned about the pollution from "idling" which is subtly indicated by C...?If the buses are roaming around,even then they are causing pollution unnecessarily,isnt it?

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 186

Intern
Joined: 09 Jul 2011
Posts: 19

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 8

Re: For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2013, 07:44
The statement does not indicate that there is MORE exaust gas emitted when idling compared to that when it is in running state. Which means that irrespective how much time the bus spends idling Vs time spent on running is irrelevent. But the fact that other automobiles do not pollute as much as the buses do ,, would mean that when the bus pollution issue is addressed we are going to see a substantial decrease in pollution of the buildings.

Where am I going wrong ?

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 8

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 1127

Kudos [?]: 3480 [4], given: 123

Location: United States
Re: For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2013, 17:59
4
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
ramanujanu wrote:
The statement does not indicate that there is MORE exaust gas emitted when idling compared to that when it is in running state. Which means that irrespective how much time the bus spends idling Vs time spent on running is irrelevent. But the fact that other automobiles do not pollute as much as the buses do ,, would mean that when the bus pollution issue is addressed we are going to see a substantial decrease in pollution of the buildings.

Where am I going wrong ?

Hi ramanujanu:

Maybe my post helps you.

You're correct: The statement does not indicate that there is MORE exaust gas emitted when idling compared to that when it is in running state.

Actually, you don't need that information at all. The fact that idling vehicles create MORE or LESS exhaust does not matter.

The proposal is based on the assumption that idling vehicles DO emit exhaust.
There are two types of vehicles: (1) running; (2) idling.
You cannot anything to affect running vehicles. The only thing you can do to reduce exhaust is STOP idling vehicles emitting. Correct?

How do you make idling vehicles STOP emitting ==> The solution is building parking garage. Those vehicle will stop emitting when they are parked.

Let get back to answer C. why C is correct.

C says: "Tour buses spend less than 1/4 of the time they are transporting passengers from one site to another." It means these tour buses spend almost the time on IDLING. That's KEY point for the success of the proposal. Because if these buses run almost the time. You cannot do anything to stop them emitting exhaust.

Hope my post helps.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Kudos [?]: 3480 [4], given: 123

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10110

Kudos [?]: 263 [0], given: 0

Re: For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2014, 13:29
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 263 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10110

Kudos [?]: 263 [0], given: 0

Re: For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2014, 02:00
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 263 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 13 Jul 2015
Posts: 42

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 36

Location: Singapore
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V39
WE: Operations (Retail)
Re: For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2015, 22:25
pqhai wrote:
ramanujanu wrote:
The statement does not indicate that there is MORE exaust gas emitted when idling compared to that when it is in running state. Which means that irrespective how much time the bus spends idling Vs time spent on running is irrelevent. But the fact that other automobiles do not pollute as much as the buses do ,, would mean that when the bus pollution issue is addressed we are going to see a substantial decrease in pollution of the buildings.

Where am I going wrong ?

Hi ramanujanu:

Maybe my post helps you.

You're correct: The statement does not indicate that there is MORE exaust gas emitted when idling compared to that when it is in running state.

Actually, you don't need that information at all. The fact that idling vehicles create MORE or LESS exhaust does not matter.

The proposal is based on the assumption that idling vehicles DO emit exhaust.
There are two types of vehicles: (1) running; (2) idling.
You cannot anything to affect running vehicles. The only thing you can do to reduce exhaust is STOP idling vehicles emitting. Correct?

How do you make idling vehicles STOP emitting ==> The solution is building parking garage. Those vehicle will stop emitting when they are parked.

Let get back to answer C. why C is correct.

C says: "Tour buses spend less than 1/4 of the time they are transporting passengers from one site to another." It means these tour buses spend almost the time on IDLING. That's KEY point for the success of the proposal. Because if these buses run almost the time. You cannot do anything to stop them emitting exhaust.

Hope my post helps.

Hey I fully agree with your point. However, for statement B, if exhaust is the only thing damaging the buildings, then reducing exhaust from idling will reduce the damage. This addresses the possibility that NOT only exhaust is causing the damage. So doesn't this strengthen the argument and make the conclusion more likely? What's wrong with this reasoning? Is it out of scope?

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 36

Re: For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito   [#permalink] 01 Oct 2015, 22:25

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 43 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by