I27-10

Question

In response to increasing environmental concerns and new government regulations, Woodchuck Timber Co. is implementing sustainable logging practices. This includes using lower-impact logging machinery and reserving additional land for reforestation efforts. These changes will improve our public image and align us with the Green Lumber Certification program, potentially opening us up for subsidies and grants from governmental environmental agencies. However, be aware that sustainable methods are more costly, both in terms of purchasing eco-friendly machinery and the additional space required for conservation. Despite these costs, I believe this is a crucial step for our future growth and approval rates with both the public and government.

Based on the information provided, which of the following would most likely reduce the financial burden associated with the Sustainable Logging Initiative?

	Reducing the area reserved for reforestation, allowing more land for harvesting.
	Seeking additional government grants to further offset the increased operating costs.
	Investing in eco-friendly machinery that requires less maintenance.
	Increasing the price of products to pass some costs to consumers.
	Partnering with other companies to share the costs of eco-friendly equipment.

Show Answer

Official Answer

Seeking additional government grants to further offset the increased operating costs.

Bunuel · Answer

Official Solution:

We are asked to find the statement that would most likely reduce the financial burden associated with the Sustainable Logging Initiative and be based on the text. All of the possible options seem reasonable, however, only government grants are mentioned in the text to be used as way to cut costs. So, our answer is:  Seeking additional government grants to further offset the increased operating costs.

Correct answer:

Based on the information provided, which of the following would most likely reduce the financial burden associated with the Sustainable Logging Initiative?  "Seeking additional government grants to further offset the increased operating costs."

xqh · Answer

I did not quite understand the solution. Why the choice A is not the answer? Since it is more controllable to cut the land reforestation cost listed in the table by reducing the reserved area for reforestation, rather than to seek grants, the amount of which will be decided by governments, not by the company.

Bunuel · Answer

Because A conflicts with the very condition that unlocks the savings.

The emails say the reforestation set-aside enables Green Lumber certification and qualifies the company for grants. If you cut that area, you risk losing certification and the 70,000 in grants. That would save at most 35,000 on land but could forfeit 70,000, making the net burden worse. Grants already shrink the 75,000 cost increase to about 5,000, so seeking more grants is the option most likely to reduce the burden within the stated plan.

Perseuss · Answer

I did not quite understand the solution. Why C cannot be an answer? If maintenance decreased, then cost and financial burden could be decreased.

Bunuel · Answer

The passage never says eco-friendly machinery lowers maintenance expenses. The only cost-relief method actually mentioned is government grants, so that’s the only option supported by the text.

kabirgandhi · Answer

I think the reason this question is interesting is that we have all trained ourselves to ask questions like: "Which of the following, if true?" In this question, we are not looking for an if true strengthener, instead, we are looking for what the text has itself provided, a detail very easy to miss.

RajivJoarder · Answer

I did not quite understand the solution. Why cant - Increasing the price of products to pass some costs to consumers. can't be a solution?

Bunuel · Answer

Increasing prices could reduce the burden in real life, but the passage gives no evidence that customers would accept higher prices.

The key phrase is  based on the information provided . The text specifically mentions grants as a way to offset the increased costs, so seeking additional grants is the option best supported by the passage. The price increase option is  possible , but not supported by the given information.

I27-10

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards