jawele wrote:
rish2708 wrote:
As per the statement it says most of "the decline of total % weight of beverage" is attributrf to recyclable aluminium and glass.
The aluminums were more recycled and glasses were not.
As per the logic, can't we deduce that the recycled glass was not returned back to the cycle?
I mean what if the glasses were used for other purposes on recycling. And option B fits properly for that.
I agree that c is right but why b is wrong ? Considering the above fact?
Posted from my mobile device
Hi Rish2708,
I think that your thinking is good, but I believe that you've misinterpreted B in some way. The passage talks about GALSS BOTTLES, so even if they contained something else, they were still brought to the cycle because they are the same recyclable objects.
Hope this helps
Hi Jawele,
Thanks for your post. Yeah I get it... I misinterpreted. My line of thinking was proper i.e two things:
i) Either the weight per glass has somehow reduced than aluminium ( in the garbage)
ii) The glass is taken out of the cycle somehow.
Option C clearly falls in line with my thought process #2. I agree that the BOTTLE containing anything irrespective of the substance shall be ( = has a probable chance ) of getting into the garbage and recycled.
Thanks for pointing out. I rectified my error !! Nice question and nice explaination from you!!
close
