Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 19:01 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 19:01
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
Close
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
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   4   5 
805+ Level|   Strengthen|         
User avatar
ananta9399
User avatar
Joined: 30 Apr 2023
Last visit: 13 Mar 2025
Posts: 12
Own Kudos:
20
 [1]
Given Kudos: 25
Location: India
Schools: ISB '27 (II)
GMAT 1: 600 Q49 V23
GPA: 8.4
Schools: ISB '27 (II)
GMAT 1: 600 Q49 V23
Posts: 12
Kudos: 20
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 05:11
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
Environmental Policy Speech: Critics of the new Clean Energy Bill argue that it will lead to higher energy costs due to the implementation of expensive renewable energy technologies. However, since the bill was passed, not only has the number of renewable energy projects increased significantly, but the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year. Thus, it is clear that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in not only increasing renewable energy usage but also in reducing electricity costs for consumers.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the policy speech?

(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.

(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.


­
 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the GMAT Club Olympics Competition

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Tests, Private Tutoring, and more

 

­
Show more
­Critics say energy cost would be higher because of expensive tech
Policy says a) renewable projects have increased b) avg cost lower than national avg cost
Conclusion: CBE is effective in energy usage & reducing electricity cost

Ans A: it says that the cost of setting up the tech is not expensive (implementation not expensive): it weakens the position of the critics hence strengthening the policy
User avatar
sdow
User avatar
Joined: 04 Mar 2024
Last visit: 02 Oct 2024
Posts: 23
Own Kudos:
23
 [1]
Given Kudos: 53
GMAT Focus 1: 575 Q79 V80 DI76
GPA: 3.76
GMAT Focus 1: 575 Q79 V80 DI76
Posts: 23
Kudos: 23
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 05:17
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The increase in renewable enegy projects and the decrease in the average cost of electricity observed.
­(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.
Because of the low cost of setting up, renewable energy projects increase and also cost of electricity for consumers fell
(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.
this option weakens the argument saying the CEB was not effective
(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.
weakens
(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.
weakens
(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.
but why the cost of electricity from renewables decrease also does not really strengthen the arguments in the text
User avatar
mialanknox
User avatar
Joined: 15 May 2019
Last visit: 19 Oct 2025
Posts: 141
Own Kudos:
194
 [1]
Given Kudos: 99
Location: Switzerland
Concentration: Finance, General Management
Schools: Wharton '26 CBS '26 Kellogg '26 Booth '26
GPA: 4
WE:Investment Banking (Finance: Investment Banking)
Schools: Wharton '26 CBS '26 Kellogg '26 Booth '26
Posts: 141
Kudos: 194
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 05:23
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
Environmental Policy Speech: Critics of the new Clean Energy Bill argue that it will lead to higher energy costs due to the implementation of expensive renewable energy technologies. However, since the bill was passed, not only has the number of renewable energy projects increased significantly, but the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year. Thus, it is clear that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in not only increasing renewable energy usage but also in reducing electricity costs for consumers.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the policy speech?

(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.

(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.


­
 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the GMAT Club Olympics Competition

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Tests, Private Tutoring, and more

 

­
Show more
­(A) This suggests a global decrease in setup costs for renewable energy, which indirectly supports the argument but does not directly link the bill to lower costs.

(B) This shows that electricity costs were rising before the bill, highlighting the bill's positive impact on reversing this trend, thereby strengthening the argument.

(C) This weakens the argument by indicating that some renewable projects failed due to inefficiencies.

(D) This directly strengthens the argument by showing that conventional energy costs remained higher, underscoring the cost-effectiveness of renewable energy under the bill. This supports the claim that the Clean Energy Bill has helped reduce costs through renewable energy sources by showing the difference in cost trends between renewable and non-renewable sources.

(E) This strengthens the argument by showing that areas without the bill experienced rising costs, suggesting the bill helped reduce or stabilize costs where implemented.

Therefore, option D is the correct answer.
T
User avatar
BGbogoss
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jan 2024
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 38
Own Kudos:
58
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2
Posts: 38
Kudos: 58
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 05:40
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Let's examine each option:

(A)This option provides a reason why renewable energy costs may have decreased, but it does not directly link the decrease in costs to the Clean Energy Bill. It implies a broader trend that might have influenced costs regardless of the bill. And even thought the cost of setting up these projects may have decreased, it doesn't state that they have decreased significantly enough for the consumers to lower their electricity bills.
(B)This strengthens the argument by showing that the bill potentially reversed a negative trend. If costs were rising before the bill and have now decreased, it suggests the bill had a positive impact.
(C)This weakens the argument as it suggests not all projects were successful, implying potential flaws or inefficiencies in the bill's implementation.
(D)This strengthens the argument by providing a comparison showing that renewable energy sources are cheaper than conventional sources. This directly supports the claim of reduced electricity costs.
(E) This indirectly strengthens the argument by contrasting the positive effects of the Clean Energy Bill areas with the negative trends in other areas, suggesting the bill's effectiveness.

Among these, option (D) provides the most direct support for the argument by showing a clear and consistent cost benefit of renewable energy over conventional sources, reinforcing the claim that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in reducing electricity costs for consumers.

Answer: (D)
User avatar
anish0953
User avatar
Joined: 20 May 2024
Last visit: 13 Mar 2025
Posts: 86
Own Kudos:
49
 [1]
Given Kudos: 103
Location: United Kingdom
Concentration: Leadership, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 9.2
WE:Business Development (Finance)
Products:
My Reviews
Posts: 86
Kudos: 49
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 05:54
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
Environmental Policy Speech: Critics of the new Clean Energy Bill argue that it will lead to higher energy costs due to the implementation of expensive renewable energy technologies. However, since the bill was passed, not only has the number of renewable energy projects increased significantly, but the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year. Thus, it is clear that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in not only increasing renewable energy usage but also in reducing electricity costs for consumers.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the policy speech?

(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.

(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.


­
 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the GMAT Club Olympics Competition

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Tests, Private Tutoring, and more

 

­
Show more
­The argument in the policy speech is that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in both increasing renewable energy usage and reducing electricity costs for consumers. To strengthen this argument, we need to show that renewable energy, supported by the Clean Energy Bill, is not only viable but also cost-effective compared to other energy sources.

Let's analyze each option:

(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.
This suggests that renewable energy has become more affordable to implement, which supports the argument that renewable energy projects under the Clean Energy Bill are cost-effective. However, it is a general statement about global trends and does not directly relate to the specific impact of the Clean Energy Bill.

(B) **Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.**  
This indicates that before the Clean Energy Bill, electricity costs were increasing. It provides context for the effectiveness of the bill but does not directly compare renewable and non-renewable costs during the bill's implementation.

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.
This weakens the argument by indicating that not all renewable projects have been successful or cost-effective.

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.
This strengthens the argument by directly comparing the costs of renewable energy (lower than the national average) with non-renewable energy (higher than the national average). It shows that renewable energy under the Clean Energy Bill is more cost-effective than conventional energy.

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.
This also supports the argument by indicating that areas not benefiting from the bill are facing higher electricity costs due to reliance on non-renewable energy. It implies that the bill is effective in controlling energy costs.

Among these options, (D) most directly strengthens the argument in the policy speech by showing that the cost of electricity from non-renewable sources has remained higher than the national average, highlighting the cost-effectiveness of renewable energy projects supported by the Clean Energy Bill.
 
User avatar
YogeshBardia
User avatar
Joined: 24 Jun 2023
Last visit: 19 Jan 2025
Posts: 22
Own Kudos:
41
 [1]
Given Kudos: 18
Schools: LBS MiM "26
GPA: 4
WE:Analyst (Consulting)
Schools: LBS MiM "26
Posts: 22
Kudos: 41
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 06:05
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
 
Quote:
­Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the policy speech?
Show more
(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years. This supports the idea presented in the passage as the costs are being reduced.

(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented. This opposed the idea presented as it means that the costs right now are inflated and hence the cost of renewable energy can still be greater than the actual cost of the non-renewable energy.

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies. This does not help the idea in the passage.

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period. This is a trap answer as it means that there are other factors which helped reduce the national energy production costs,but it does not necessarily mean that it was reduced because of only renewable energy.

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.This does not help the idea in the passage.
User avatar
omaymab
User avatar
Joined: 03 Oct 2019
Last visit: 16 Aug 2025
Posts: 4
Own Kudos:
3
 [1]
Given Kudos: 60
Posts: 4
Kudos: 3
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 06:16
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years => Setup costs only do not provide insights about the overall cost of projects under the Bill

(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented => Ireelevant to the main argument

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies => weakens the main argument

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period. => This argument provide a storng point to promote the cost effectiveness of renewable energy promoted by the Clean Energy Bill

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources. => Does not provide a clear indication of whether or not the costs in these areas are higher/lower than in the areas within the influence of the Clean Energy Bill
User avatar
Milkyway_28
User avatar
Joined: 23 May 2024
Last visit: 19 Apr 2025
Posts: 50
Own Kudos:
56
 [1]
Given Kudos: 71
Location: Kazakhstan
Posts: 50
Kudos: 56
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 06:24
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The environmental policy speech can be divided into three sections. 

1. Critics counter-claim
"Critics of the new Clean Energy Bill argue that it will lead to higher energy costs due to the implementation of expensive renewable energy technologies."

2. Claim
"However, since the bill was passed, not only has the number of renewable energy projects increased significantly, but the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year"

3. Conclusion
"Thus, it is clear that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in not only increasing renewable energy usage but also in reducing electricity costs for consumers."

The first part demonstrates what has been said by critics, the second part argues this saying it is not true, and the conclusion is the heart of the speech. So we can say the argument of the Environment Policy Speech is its conclusion. 

Therefore the argument is the Clean Energy bill --> + increasing renewable energy usage and - reducing electricity costs for consumers

We need to find the answer choice that best supports this. 

(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.

Does not really address either of these

(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.

Does not fall into the timeframe after the implementation of the Clean Energy Bill

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.

Works against the argument if anything. 

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.

This answer choice indicates the same time frame as the introduction of the Clean Energy Bill. Whereas renewable energy costs have decreased below the average, electricity from conventional sources has remained consistently higher than the national average. 

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.

"Outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill" means we cannot assess the influence of the Clean Energy Bill. 

Therefore answer is D
Bunuel
Environmental Policy Speech: Critics of the new Clean Energy Bill argue that it will lead to higher energy costs due to the implementation of expensive renewable energy technologies. However, since the bill was passed, not only has the number of renewable energy projects increased significantly, but the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year. Thus, it is clear that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in not only increasing renewable energy usage but also in reducing electricity costs for consumers.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the policy speech?

(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.

(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.


­
 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the GMAT Club Olympics Competition

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Tests, Private Tutoring, and more

 

­
Show more
­
User avatar
lhg1709
User avatar
Joined: 10 Aug 2023
Last visit: 18 Feb 2025
Posts: 34
Own Kudos:
30
 [1]
Given Kudos: 54
Posts: 34
Kudos: 30
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 06:44
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Environmental Policy Speech: Critics of the new Clean Energy Bill argue that it will lead to higher energy costs due to the implementation of expensive renewable energy technologies. However, since the bill was passed, not only has the number of renewable energy projects increased significantly, but the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year. Thus, it is clear that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in not only increasing renewable energy usage but also in reducing electricity costs for consumers.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the policy speech?

(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years. => CORRECT => Strenghtens the argument that " the number of renewable energy projects increased significantly, but the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year"

(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented. => Not really strengthen the argument

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies. => Quite the opposite in the text

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period. => Should be lower not higher

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources. => Should be the other way around
User avatar
paradise1234
User avatar
Joined: 21 Nov 2023
Last visit: 24 Jan 2025
Posts: 32
Own Kudos:
42
 [1]
Given Kudos: 8
Posts: 32
Kudos: 42
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 06:46
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
­Conclusion: Thus, it is clear that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in not only increasing renewable energy usage but also in reducing electricity costs for consumers.

((D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.

This statement gives proof that the electricity cost has gone down. Conventional sources are still high, it's the renewable sources that is bringing the average down.
The only option that strengthens this conclusion is D. 

Ans D
User avatar
Lizaza
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2021
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 165
Own Kudos:
219
 [1]
Given Kudos: 5
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V40
GMAT 1: 710 Q47 V40
Posts: 165
Kudos: 219
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 06:55
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The argument claims that because the renewable energy costs were lower than the national average, it proves the effectiveness of the clean energy bill. There’s also a side argument that the number of related projects increased as well.

Option A is rather a weakener, as it diminishes the cost—effectiveness impact.
Option B is out of scope, as we are dealing with the years past the Bill implementation.
Point C tries to ‘attack’ the general project increase point, but it’s neither here nor there and doesn’t directly engage with the reasoning. Eliminate.
Point D is not bad, because it only further stresses the cost difference in renewable and non-renewable energy sources.
Point E is actually kind of weakening, because it attributes the relative efficiency not to renewable sources, but to (theoretically) growth in non-renewable costs. Plus, it’s speaking about other areas, which can be considered out of scope.

IMO, the right answer should be D.

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
Catman
User avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2017
Last visit: 12 Feb 2025
Posts: 320
Own Kudos:
328
 [1]
Given Kudos: 219
Products:
My Reviews
Posts: 320
Kudos: 328
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 06:57
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Two policy points:
1. the number of renewable energy projects increased significantly
2. the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year.  Alternatively, the average cost from other sources has to be higher than the national average cost of electricity.

(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.
If the cost of setting up has decreased, than it is not because of the clean energy bill the number of renewable energy projects has increased. This weakens the argument.

(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.
If electricity costs were rising than the other factors related to the electricity production are not helping to reduce the electricity cost. If after the implementation of Clean Energy Bill, the average cost of electricity from the renewable sources has been lower than the national average, than the bill is successfull. 

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.
Potential weakener as the Overall project increased significantly, if some projects have been discontinued than it is not good from the policy point of view.

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.
This does not impact the argument. We are looking for non- conventional sources.

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.­
The argument is only related to the policy outcome and How Clean Energy Bill has been successful in the above 2 mentioned points.

IMO B.­
User avatar
pianogirl
User avatar
Joined: 28 Sep 2022
Last visit: 25 May 2025
Posts: 47
Own Kudos:
76
 [1]
Given Kudos: 6
Posts: 47
Kudos: 76
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 07:01
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
(A) Wrong this attributes the cost reduction to global trends rather than the bill itself.

(B) Wrong This describes the trend of electricity costs before the Clean Energy Bill and doesn’t talk about the costs after.

(C) Wrong the success of some of the renewable energy projects is irrelevant to the global success of the Clean Energy Bill in increasing the usage and decreasing the costs.

(D) Right this strengthen the argument as it shows that the conventional sources cost stays higher and therefore highlight even more the low cost of renewable energy after the bill

(E) Wrong this supports the argument by showing the benefits of the Clean Energy Bill through the contrast with areas that haven’t implemented it. But it does not directly address the impact in the area

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
Suboopc
User avatar
Joined: 14 Mar 2023
Last visit: 02 Jul 2025
Posts: 82
Own Kudos:
138
 [1]
Given Kudos: 5
Posts: 82
Kudos: 138
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 07:18
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:



Bunuel
Bunuel
­Environmental Policy Speech: Critics of the new Clean Energy Bill argue that it will lead to higher energy costs due to the implementation of expensive renewable energy technologies. However, since the bill was passed, not only has the number of renewable energy projects increased significantly, but the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year. Thus, it is clear that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in not only increasing renewable energy usage but also in reducing electricity costs for consumers.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the policy speech?

(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.

(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.

­
 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the GMAT Club Olympics Competition

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Tests, Private Tutoring, and more

 

­
­

GMAT Club Official Explanation:



Correct Answer: D. The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.

Logically, If conventional electricity costs have been higher, that means the renewable energy costs had to be lower in order to off-set the average cost of electricity, which is the argument’s claim - that the renewable sources have been reducing electricity cost. This is our answer. 


A. The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.

This answer choice is irrelevant as we are not concerned with the setup costs. The answer choice wants you to go down an assumption staircase that if the setup cost is lower, then perhaps the overall cost would be lower but we don’t know how much lower it is (is it lower than conventional sources? Maybe but maybe not). Also, if we are making assumptions, what about operating costs? This option requires a number of assumptions and cannot be the answer. Eliminate.

B. Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.

B does not strengthen the claim about the ongoing impact of the bill on current electricity costs compared to non-renewable sources. We just know that the cost of electricity was running up and it is not clear what impact it has on the bill or the claim. Eliminate.

C. Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.

C actually weakens the argument by suggesting problems with some renewable energy projects, contrary to the speech's claim of effectiveness. Eliminate.

E. The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.

This is a trap answer choice. It tells us that areas outside of the influence of the Clean Energy Bill have seen their costs rise. This answer choice is designed to make you combine information from other answer choices (big no-no on the GMAT) and wants you to think that it means that the Clean Energy Bill therefore worked to reduce the energy costs but we don’t know how the rise in other areas compares to the clean energy bill areas. This answer choice tells us NOTHING in support of the Clean Energy Bill areas. Maybe the Clean Energy Bill areas also had a rise that was much higher due to renewable resource price increase. Eliminate.­
Show more
­I have a doubt, Options D here supplys us with no new information.
We are told that the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year.
Meaning, we already know that cost of electricity is higher than average for conventional energy source.
If there was any other possibilty, then this would have strengthened.
As it stands, this neither strengthens nor weakens the argument.

I felt options A could be the next best option since it somewhat counters the critics point of high setup cost. Again, we don't know by how much this cost has decreased so we can't be sure how much it strengthens but we do know that it is cheaper than the price that the critics were worried about.
avatar
bronaugust
avatar
Joined: 06 Jun 2024
Last visit: 29 Aug 2024
Posts: 233
Own Kudos:
315
 [2]
Given Kudos: 33
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 233
Kudos: 315
 [2]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics Updated on: 16 Jul 2024, 08:11
Originally posted by bronaugust on 16 Jul 2024, 07:32.
Last edited by bronaugust on 16 Jul 2024, 08:11, edited 3 times in total.
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
 
Bunuel

Quote:
  ­Environmental Policy Speech: Critics of the new Clean Energy Bill argue that it will lead to higher energy costs due to the implementation of expensive renewable energy technologies. However, since the bill was passed, not only has the number of renewable energy projects increased significantly, but the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year. Thus, it is clear that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in not only increasing renewable energy usage but also in reducing electricity costs for consumers.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the policy speech?

(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.

(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.

­
 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the GMAT Club Olympics Competition

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Tests, Private Tutoring, and more

 

­
­

GMAT Club Official Explanation:



Correct Answer: D. The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.

Logically, If conventional electricity costs have been higher, that means the renewable energy costs had to be lower in order to off-set the average cost of electricity, which is the argument’s claim - that the renewable sources have been reducing electricity cost. This is our answer. 


A. The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.

This answer choice is irrelevant as we are not concerned with the setup costs. The answer choice wants you to go down an assumption staircase that if the setup cost is lower, then perhaps the overall cost would be lower but we don’t know how much lower it is (is it lower than conventional sources? Maybe but maybe not). Also, if we are making assumptions, what about operating costs? This option requires a number of assumptions and cannot be the answer. Eliminate.

B. Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.

B does not strengthen the claim about the ongoing impact of the bill on current electricity costs compared to non-renewable sources. We just know that the cost of electricity was running up and it is not clear what impact it has on the bill or the claim. Eliminate.

C. Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.

C actually weakens the argument by suggesting problems with some renewable energy projects, contrary to the speech's claim of effectiveness. Eliminate.

E. The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.

This is a trap answer choice. It tells us that areas outside of the influence of the Clean Energy Bill have seen their costs rise. This answer choice is designed to make you combine information from other answer choices (big no-no on the GMAT) and wants you to think that it means that the Clean Energy Bill therefore worked to reduce the energy costs but we don’t know how the rise in other areas compares to the clean energy bill areas. This answer choice tells us NOTHING in support of the Clean Energy Bill areas. Maybe the Clean Energy Bill areas also had a rise that was much higher due to renewable resource price increase. Eliminate.­
Show more
I totally disagree with the explanation. 

The premise in the argument already says that ­the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year. One can therefore infer that the average cost of electricity from other sources (sources that are not renewable) is higher than the national average cost of electricity every year.

Let us say the national average cost of electricity is $100 every year. 

The average cost of electricity from renewable sources ranges from $50 to $60.
Clearly, the average cost of electicity from all other sources (sources that are not renewable) has to be above the national average.  

So, how can answer option (D) that actually is an inference be a strengthener? 

Also, when you look at answer option (E), you do not look at it in isolation. You are to take into consideration what is already stated in the argument. If the average cost of electricity from renewable sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year and if the price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources, the argument that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in not only increasing renewable energy usage but also in reducing electricity costs for consumers is strengthened. Your explanation further says 'maybe the Clean Energy Bill areas also had a rise that was much higher due to renewable resource price increase'. Why would we say this when the argument clearly mentions that the average cost of electricity from renewable sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year?

By the way, if one says, 'The price of this product has risen outside our area this month,' it can only mean 2 things
-> The price has remained the same in our area this month, or
-> The price has decreased in our area this month. 

I would like someone to shed light on this explanation, which, I am sorry to say, makes no sense. ­
User avatar
bb
User avatar
Founder
Joined: 04 Dec 2002
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 42,383
Own Kudos:
82,110
 [1]
Given Kudos: 24,105
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 3
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
Posts: 42,383
Kudos: 82,110
 [1]
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 07:46
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Suboopc

Quote:



Bunuel
Bunuel
­Environmental Policy Speech: Critics of the new Clean Energy Bill argue that it will lead to higher energy costs due to the implementation of expensive renewable energy technologies. However, since the bill was passed, not only has the number of renewable energy projects increased significantly, but the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year. Thus, it is clear that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in not only increasing renewable energy usage but also in reducing electricity costs for consumers.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the policy speech?

(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.

(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.

­
 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the GMAT Club Olympics Competition

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Tests, Private Tutoring, and more

 

­
­

GMAT Club Official Explanation:



Correct Answer: D. The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.

Logically, If conventional electricity costs have been higher, that means the renewable energy costs had to be lower in order to off-set the average cost of electricity, which is the argument’s claim - that the renewable sources have been reducing electricity cost. This is our answer. 


A. The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.

This answer choice is irrelevant as we are not concerned with the setup costs. The answer choice wants you to go down an assumption staircase that if the setup cost is lower, then perhaps the overall cost would be lower but we don’t know how much lower it is (is it lower than conventional sources? Maybe but maybe not). Also, if we are making assumptions, what about operating costs? This option requires a number of assumptions and cannot be the answer. Eliminate.

B. Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.

B does not strengthen the claim about the ongoing impact of the bill on current electricity costs compared to non-renewable sources. We just know that the cost of electricity was running up and it is not clear what impact it has on the bill or the claim. Eliminate.

C. Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.

C actually weakens the argument by suggesting problems with some renewable energy projects, contrary to the speech's claim of effectiveness. Eliminate.

E. The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.

This is a trap answer choice. It tells us that areas outside of the influence of the Clean Energy Bill have seen their costs rise. This answer choice is designed to make you combine information from other answer choices (big no-no on the GMAT) and wants you to think that it means that the Clean Energy Bill therefore worked to reduce the energy costs but we don’t know how the rise in other areas compares to the clean energy bill areas. This answer choice tells us NOTHING in support of the Clean Energy Bill areas. Maybe the Clean Energy Bill areas also had a rise that was much higher due to renewable resource price increase. Eliminate.­
­I have a doubt, Options D here supplys us with no new information.
We are told that the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year.
Meaning, we already know that cost of electricity is higher than average for conventional energy source.
If there was any other possibilty, then this would have strengthened.
As it stands, this neither strengthens nor weakens the argument.

I felt options A could be the next best option since it somewhat counters the critics point of high setup cost. Again, we don't know by how much this cost has decreased so we can't be sure how much it strengthens but we do know that it is cheaper than the price that the critics were worried about.
Show more
­
You are absolutely correct here. if the average consists of convention and non-conventional costs, then knowing 2 out of 3 gives us the third, and that breaks the trap we tried to set here    :cry:
Which means this question does not have a correct answer.
I will give kudos to all answers for this question. ­
User avatar
varad98
User avatar
Joined: 06 Aug 2022
Last visit: 02 Mar 2025
Posts: 60
Own Kudos:
26
Given Kudos: 35
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q86 V81 DI79
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.8
Products:
My Reviews
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q86 V81 DI79
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V34
Posts: 60
Kudos: 26
GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics 16 Jul 2024, 07:49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
Environmental Policy Speech: Critics of the new Clean Energy Bill argue that it will lead to higher energy costs due to the implementation of expensive renewable energy technologies. However, since the bill was passed, not only has the number of renewable energy projects increased significantly, but the average cost of electricity from these sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year. Thus, it is clear that the Clean Energy Bill has been effective in not only increasing renewable energy usage but also in reducing electricity costs for consumers.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the policy speech?

(A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years.

(B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented.

(C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies.

(D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources has remained consistently higher than the national average during the same period.

(E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.


­
 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the GMAT Club Olympics Competition

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Tests, Private Tutoring, and more

 

­
Show more
­Option D does not add any new information. We can alrady infer option D from question itself. "Average cost of electricity from these (renewable) sources has been lower than the national average cost of electricity every year.
That is only issue I had with Option D.
Option B has is not correct answer. We don't know average value of electricity before the bill was passed. If it were lower, renewables have affected pricing in bad way. Its not full proof answer. ­
   1   2   3   4   5 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts