In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 22 Feb 2017, 12:29

### 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

# In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 30 May 2007
Posts: 55
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2007, 21:23
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air pollution reached unhealthful amounts and a smog alert was put into effect. In early 1987, new air pollution control measures were enacted, but the city had smog alerts on 31 days that year and on 39 days the following year. In 1989, however, the number of smog alerts in Los Diablos dropped to sixteen. The main air pollutants in Los Diablos are ozone and carbon monoxide, and since 1986 the levels of both have been monitored by gas spectrography.
Which of the following statements, assuming that each is true, would be LEAST helpful in explaining the air pollution levels in Los Diablos between 1986 and 1989?
(A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988.
(B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented.
(C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful.
(D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures.
(E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area
If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
Director
Joined: 26 Feb 2006
Posts: 904
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 110 [0], given: 0

Re: cr air pollution [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2007, 21:30
nehanishika wrote:
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air pollution reached unhealthful amounts and a smog alert was put into effect. In early 1987, new air pollution control measures were enacted, but the city had smog alerts on 31 days that year and on 39 days the following year. In 1989, however, the number of smog alerts in Los Diablos dropped to sixteen. The main air pollutants in Los Diablos are ozone and carbon monoxide, and since 1986 the levels of both have been monitored by gas spectrography.
Which of the following statements, assuming that each is true, would be LEAST helpful in explaining the air pollution levels in Los Diablos between 1986 and 1989?
(A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988.
(B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented.
(C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful.
(D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures.
(E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area

I go for D.
Manager
Joined: 21 Mar 2007
Posts: 50
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 0

Cr- Air pollution [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2007, 21:52
C for me
Senior Manager
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 332
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

Re: cr air pollution [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2007, 23:14
nehanishika wrote:
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air pollution reached unhealthful amounts and a smog alert was put into effect. In early 1987, new air pollution control measures were enacted, but the city had smog alerts on 31 days that year and on 39 days the following year. In 1989, however, the number of smog alerts in Los Diablos dropped to sixteen. The main air pollutants in Los Diablos are ozone and carbon monoxide, and since 1986 the levels of both have been monitored by gas spectrography.
Which of the following statements, assuming that each is true, would be LEAST helpful in explaining the air pollution levels in Los Diablos between 1986 and 1989?
(A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988.
(B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented.
(C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful.
(D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures.
(E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area

A, B, C, D - explains the contradiction

E for me
Senior Manager
Joined: 04 Mar 2007
Posts: 440
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2007, 23:24
I go for B
A new accurate gas spectrometer does not explain the decrease
Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 96
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Jun 2007, 01:10
I'd say E.

If it takes 2 years to break down, what happened to last years excess carbon monoxide and ozone
Manager
Joined: 26 Oct 2006
Posts: 177
Location: uk
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Jun 2007, 01:49
I would go for B.
In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented. . This means the spectrometer used to test was quite accurate. So this will not explain the huge decrease in the number of alerts.
Director
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 503
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Jun 2007, 02:20
Facts:
1 - since 1986 the levels of both have been monitored by gas spectrography
2 - The main air pollutants in Los Diablos are ozone and carbon monoxide
3 - In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air pollution reached unhealthful amounts and a smog alert was put into effect.
4 - In early 1987, new air pollution control measures were enacted,
5 - but the city had smog alerts on 31 days in 1987 and on 39 days the 1988
6 - In 1989, however, the number of smog alerts in Los Diablos dropped to sixteen

Let's look at the options now.

(A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988. – Supports in explaining. So come 1989 the air pollution dropped

(B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented. – Measured SMOG more accurately so the number alerts were less.

(C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful. – Supports in explaining.The threshold was set higher for a smog alert. So less alarms.

(D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures. - This clearly does not support. If this was true then the smog alerts would have gone down in 1988 itself but that is not the case. Smog alerts went up in 1988.

(E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area – Supports in explaining.Once the Carbon Monooxide and Ozone of 1987 went down it result in less amount of smog due to new regulations.

Hence D is the answer.
Senior Manager
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 332
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Jun 2007, 02:38
vc019 wrote:
Facts:
1 - since 1986 the levels of both have been monitored by gas spectrography
2 - The main air pollutants in Los Diablos are ozone and carbon monoxide
3 - In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air pollution reached unhealthful amounts and a smog alert was put into effect.
4 - In early 1987, new air pollution control measures were enacted,
5 - but the city had smog alerts on 31 days in 1987 and on 39 days the 1988
6 - In 1989, however, the number of smog alerts in Los Diablos dropped to sixteen

Let's look at the options now.

(A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988. – Supports in explaining. So come 1989 the air pollution dropped

(B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented. – Measured SMOG more accurately so the number alerts were less.

(C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful. – Supports in explaining.The threshold was set higher for a smog alert. So less alarms.

(D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures. - This clearly does not support. If this was true then the smog alerts would have gone down in 1988 itself but that is not the case. Smog alerts went up in 1988.

(E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area – Supports in explaining.Once the Carbon Monooxide and Ozone of 1987 went down it result in less amount of smog due to new regulations.

Hence D is the answer.

Hmmm... B, C, D, E .. all choices are already selected.. pretty interesting.
Whats the OA?
Senior Manager
Joined: 04 Mar 2007
Posts: 440
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Jun 2007, 02:49
Give me B!
If the spectrometer is more accurate, it means that its measures must be higher, not smaller!
It doesn't explain the decrease!
Director
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 503
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Jun 2007, 04:01
Caas wrote:
Give me B!
If the spectrometer is more accurate, it means that its measures must be higher, not smaller!
It doesn't explain the decrease!

- that is not neccessary, it can be the other way round too!
Manager
Joined: 30 May 2007
Posts: 55
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

Re: cr air pollution [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Jun 2007, 12:25
OA is B
intially i was not getting that why it is B, i thought it to be D,
thanks dips for your explanation for B
Manager
Joined: 30 May 2007
Posts: 55
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Jun 2007, 12:32
vc019 wrote:
Caas wrote:
Give me B!
If the spectrometer is more accurate, it means that its measures must be higher, not smaller!
It doesn't explain the decrease!

- that is not neccessary, it can be the other way round too!

hmmm..i am confused....
Manager
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 104
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Jun 2007, 13:47
I thought of B as the answer but then realised what VC019 mentioned. Far more accurate means it wasnt accurate before and it is now.
It could also mean that previously it was showing the air unhealthy though the air wasn't.Now since it is accurate it can clearly say the air is healthy thus reducing the smog alerts.

i still think its D . Though D also justifies the scene slightly but least compared to other options.
Director
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 874
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 118 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

08 Jun 2007, 20:45
Hi vc019,
See the explanation in the link below and you will be convinced that it is B.

http://www.gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=32988
Intern
Joined: 02 Jun 2007
Posts: 22
Followers: 0

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

Re: cr air pollution [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Jun 2007, 00:47
nehanishika wrote:
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air pollution reached unhealthful amounts and a smog alert was put into effect. In early 1987, new air pollution control measures were enacted, but the city had smog alerts on 31 days that year and on 39 days the following year. In 1989, however, the number of smog alerts in Los Diablos dropped to sixteen. The main air pollutants in Los Diablos are ozone and carbon monoxide, and since 1986 the levels of both have been monitored by gas spectrography.
Which of the following statements, assuming that each is true, would be LEAST helpful in explaining the air pollution levels in Los Diablos between 1986 and 1989?
(A) The 1987 air pollution control measures enacted in Los Diablos were put into effect in November of 1988.
(B) In December of 1988 a new and far more accurate gas spectrometer was invented.
(C) In February of 1989, the Pollution Control Board of Los Diablos revised the scale used to determine the amount of air pollution considered unhealthful.
(D) In 1988 the mayor of Los Diablos was found to have accepted large campaign donations from local industries and to have exempted those same industries from air pollution control measures.
(E) Excess ozone and carbon monoxide require a minimum of two years to break down naturally in the atmosphere above a given area

For me it's quite tricky question because it seemed at first best answer was C. Indeed, B doesn't explain the drop in the number of days because :
- we didn't now if the invention is used or not
- even if, it would be used, it would not favor a drop or an increase because "more accuracy" of the machine will work on both directions.
Director
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 503
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2007, 23:48
vineetgupta wrote:
Hi vc019,
See the explanation in the link below and you will be convinced that it is B.

http://www.gmatclub.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=32988

Hello vineetgupta,

I agree to the explaination on this link but really it also means that the option B is out of scope of this agrument. I would correct my explaination of point B and say it is out of scope and still say the answer is D.

The reason I would go with D and not with B now is -

B - Out of scope. Invention of a more accurate gas spectrometer does not fall in the scope of the argument.
One of the lessons I would take from this argument is "we should not make our own assumptions" - assuming here that the new spectrometer would be used is an assumption.

So, B does not weaken or strengthen the argument. Hence D is still the answer.

I would really like to know if this explaination is acceptable so that I can be sure that the line of thought is correct.
Regards

VC
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5062
Location: Singapore
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 367 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

11 Jun 2007, 00:12
B is the best. Invention of a new tool/equipment will not cause a reduction in environmental pollution.
11 Jun 2007, 00:12
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air 6 20 Dec 2010, 08:52
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air 24 07 Sep 2008, 15:39
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air 2 22 Feb 2008, 18:17
In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air 7 26 Jul 2007, 22:13
3) In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air 1 23 Mar 2007, 14:13
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# In 1986, the city of Los Diablos had 20 days on which air

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.