Forum Home > GMAT > Quantitative > Problem Solving (PS)
Events & Promotions
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Sep 1201:30 PM IST
-11:30 PM IST
With brand new features like:AI-driven Planner tool, 850+ data Insights practice questions and GMAT Focus Edition Adaptive mock tests with ESR+ analysis and personal mentor support, our course is the most comprehensive course for GMAT Focus Edition.
Sep 2001:00 PM EDT
-02:00 PM EDT
Have you ever wondered how to score a PERFECT 805 on the GMAT? Meet Julia, a banking professional who used the Target Test Prep course to achieve this incredible feat. Julia's story is nothing short of an inspiration.
From 1978 to 1988, beverage containers accounted for a steadily decrea
[#permalink]
Updated on: 04 Mar 2019, 02:58
Updated on: 04 Mar 2019, 02:58
17
Kudos
136
Bookmarks
Show timer
00:00
A
B
C
D
E
Difficulty:
65%
(hard)
Question Stats:
59% (02:14) correct
41%
(02:21)
wrong
based on 3643
sessions
From 1978 to 1988, beverage containers accounted for a steadily decreasing % of the total weight of household garbage in the United States. The increasingly widespread recycling of aluminum and glass was responsible for most of this decline. However, although aluminum recycling was more widely practiced than glass recycling, it was found that the weight of glass bottles in household garbage declined by a greater % than the weight of the aluminum cans.
Which of the following, if true of the United States in the period 1978 to 1988, most helps to account for the finding?
(A) Glass bottles are significantly heavier than aluminum cans of comparable size.
(B) Recycled aluminum cans were almost all beverage containers, but a significant fraction of the recycled glass bottles had contained products other than beverages.
(C) Manufacturers replaced many glass bottles, but few aluminum cans, with plastic containers.
(D) The total weight of glass bottles purchased by households increased at a slightly faster rate than the total weight of aluminum cans.
(E) In many areas, glass bottles had to be sorted by color of the glass before being recycled, whereas the aluminum cans required no sorting.
Which of the following, if true of the United States in the period 1978 to 1988, most helps to account for the finding?
(A) Glass bottles are significantly heavier than aluminum cans of comparable size.
(B) Recycled aluminum cans were almost all beverage containers, but a significant fraction of the recycled glass bottles had contained products other than beverages.
(C) Manufacturers replaced many glass bottles, but few aluminum cans, with plastic containers.
(D) The total weight of glass bottles purchased by households increased at a slightly faster rate than the total weight of aluminum cans.
(E) In many areas, glass bottles had to be sorted by color of the glass before being recycled, whereas the aluminum cans required no sorting.
Originally posted by mexicanhoney on 06 Oct 2007, 13:55.
Last edited by Bunuel on 04 Mar 2019, 02:58, edited 2 times in total.
Last edited by Bunuel on 04 Mar 2019, 02:58, edited 2 times in total.
Edited the question.
Re: From 1978 to 1988, beverage containers accounted for a steadily decrea
[#permalink]
07 Oct 2007, 11:54
07 Oct 2007, 11:54
14
Kudos
4
Bookmarks
The answer is C.
The question asks "what catalyst aside from recycling could cause the overall weight of glass garbage to decrease?"
A. The actual weight of glass is irrelevant as it has remained the same through time.
B. Who cares what was in the glass, as the weight is not effective.
C. Bingo! There is less glass being circulated, therefore the aggregate weight of glass will be less.
D. should have the opposite effect.
E. Color sorting, however interesting, is outside of the scope of this question
The question asks "what catalyst aside from recycling could cause the overall weight of glass garbage to decrease?"
A. The actual weight of glass is irrelevant as it has remained the same through time.
B. Who cares what was in the glass, as the weight is not effective.
C. Bingo! There is less glass being circulated, therefore the aggregate weight of glass will be less.
D. should have the opposite effect.
E. Color sorting, however interesting, is outside of the scope of this question
Re: From 1978 to 1988, beverage containers accounted for a steadily decrea
[#permalink]
20 Jan 2019, 03:15
20 Jan 2019, 03:15
8
Kudos
8
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
SushiVoyage
GMATNinja
Please help in deciphering the argument and correct choice!
The question asks us to "account for a finding," so let's take a look at the exact "finding" in the passage:Please help in deciphering the argument and correct choice!
Quote:
the weight of glass bottles in household garbage declined by a greater % than the weight of the aluminum cans.
There is a discrepancy between this finding and the fact that "aluminum recycling was more widely practiced than glass recycling." This fact would otherwise lead us to expect the weight of aluminum cans in the trash to decrease by a greater percentage than that of glass bottles, because cans that are recycled would not end up in the trash. Our task is to find an answer choice that explains the discrepancy between the finding and the evidence. Let's go through the answer choices:
Quote:
(A) Glass bottles are significantly heavier than aluminum cans of comparable size.
The finding in the passage deals with change in the percentage of weight of both items. Even if glass bottles are heavier than aluminum cans, you would still expect their weights to be reduced proportionally -- so if aluminum cans are recycled more, you would expect the weight of aluminum cans in the trash to decline more by percentage than the weight of glass bottles. Answer choice (A) would be relevant in studying the change in total weight of these materials, but not so much for percent of weight. This factor does not explain the discrepancy in the change of percentage of weight. Answer (A) is out.
Quote:
(B) Recycled aluminum cans were almost all beverage containers, but a significant fraction of the recycled glass bottles had contained products other than beverages.
If you look back at the "finding" in the passage, it does not mention beverage containers at all. We are concerned only with the weight of glass bottles and aluminum cans in the trash by percentage. The contents of those glass and aluminum objects are irrelevant to the conclusion, so answer (B) is out.Quote:
(C) Manufacturers replaced many glass bottles, but few aluminum cans, with plastic containers.
This is more like it. We need a reason for a greater decline in percentage of glass bottles in the trash than aluminum cans in the trash, and answer (C) gives us a good reason. Households replaced "many" glass bottles with plastic containers, while only replacing "few" aluminum cans with plastic. So fewer glass bottles would end up in the trash despite more aluminum cans being recycled. This accounts for the discrepancy between the evidence and finding.(C) is looking great, but let's finish up the other answer choices.
Quote:
(D) The total weight of glass bottles purchased by households increased at a slightly faster rate than the total weight of aluminum cans.
We are looking for a reason that the percentage of weight of glass is lower than expected when compared to that of aluminum. Answer (D) states that household purchases of glass bottles is increasing faster than purchases of aluminum. This is the opposite of what we need to resolve the discrepancy, so answer (D) is out. Quote:
(E) In many areas, glass bottles had to be sorted by color of the glass before being recycled, whereas the aluminum cans required no sorting.
This answer might explain why aluminum recycling is more widespread than glass recycling, but it has nothing to do with the central discrepancy we are trying to resolve: why did the percentage of weight of glass decrease more than that of aluminum? Answer (E) is out, and answer (C) is correct.
)
