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.
Dec 1310:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
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.
Dec 1410:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Think a 100% GMAT Verbal score is out of your reach? Target Test Prep will make you think again! Our course uses techniques such as topical study and spaced repetition to maximize knowledge retention and make studying simple and fun.
Dec 1411:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to learn how to Deconstruct arguments, Pre-Think Author’s Assumptions, and apply Negation Test.- Dec 15
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Dec 1608:00 AM PST
-11:59 PM PST
GMAT Club 12 Days of Christmas is a 4th Annual GMAT Club Winter Competition based on solving questions. This is the Winter GMAT competition on GMAT Club with an amazing opportunity to win over $40,000 worth of prizes!
18 Dec 2015, 02:38
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
15%
(low)
Question Stats:
80% (01:46) correct
20%
(02:05)
wrong
based on 331
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
In an attempt to protect the environment and stop oil companies from sinking a decommissioned North Sea oil platform to the bottom of the ocean, environmental groups ringed the platform with protest boats and demanded that it be towed to land, where it could be dismantled above water. Environmentalists argued that sinking the oil platform would cause irreparable damage to the deep sea ecosystem and release into the ocean over 53 tons of oil residue and heavy metals.
Which of the following, if true, indicates the plan to tow the oil platform to land is ill-suited to the environmentalist group’s goals?
(A) The National Environmental Research Council approved the sinking of the oil platform, calling it the “best practicable environmental option.”
(B) Dismantling the oil platform on land would cost over 70 million dollars, compared to the $7.5 million needed to secure and sink it in a deep ocean location.
(C) The release of 53 tons of toxic material into the ocean is very little compared to the volume of very highly toxic materials released by deep sea volcanoes.
(D) Towing the oil platform into shallow waters poses a massive risk that it may break up on its way to land, releasing the contained pollutants into fragile coastal waters.
(E) The sinking of the platform is fully in line with internationally approved guidelines for the disposal of off shore installations at sea.
Which of the following, if true, indicates the plan to tow the oil platform to land is ill-suited to the environmentalist group’s goals?
(A) The National Environmental Research Council approved the sinking of the oil platform, calling it the “best practicable environmental option.”
(B) Dismantling the oil platform on land would cost over 70 million dollars, compared to the $7.5 million needed to secure and sink it in a deep ocean location.
(C) The release of 53 tons of toxic material into the ocean is very little compared to the volume of very highly toxic materials released by deep sea volcanoes.
(D) Towing the oil platform into shallow waters poses a massive risk that it may break up on its way to land, releasing the contained pollutants into fragile coastal waters.
(E) The sinking of the platform is fully in line with internationally approved guidelines for the disposal of off shore installations at sea.
03 Jan 2016, 04:21
Kudos
Bookmarks
Anything that says land is also a bad option weaken the the environmentalist group’s goals, right!!
(A) The National Environmental Research Council approved the sinking of the oil platform, calling it the “best practicable environmental option.” ---> if authority has proved that water is the best option instead of land, then who am I challenge it.
(B) Dismantling the oil platform on land would cost over 70 million dollars, compared to the $7.5 million needed to secure and sink it in a deep ocean location. - Money is not an issue at
all. so Irrelevant.
(C) The release of 53 tons of toxic material into the ocean is very little compared to the volume of very highly toxic materials released by deep sea volcanoes. ---> even natural thing creates environmental prob, it doesnt give license to us to pollute, right!! plus nothing about that land dismantle is a bad option.
(D) Towing the oil platform into shallow waters poses a massive risk that it may break up on its way to land, releasing the contained pollutants into fragile coastal waters. ---> this is saying water is a bad option not land.
(E) The sinking of the platform is fully in line with internationally approved guidelines for the disposal of off shore installations at sea. -> whatever!!
should be A but OA is different.
(A) The National Environmental Research Council approved the sinking of the oil platform, calling it the “best practicable environmental option.” ---> if authority has proved that water is the best option instead of land, then who am I challenge it.
(B) Dismantling the oil platform on land would cost over 70 million dollars, compared to the $7.5 million needed to secure and sink it in a deep ocean location. - Money is not an issue at
all. so Irrelevant.
(C) The release of 53 tons of toxic material into the ocean is very little compared to the volume of very highly toxic materials released by deep sea volcanoes. ---> even natural thing creates environmental prob, it doesnt give license to us to pollute, right!! plus nothing about that land dismantle is a bad option.
(D) Towing the oil platform into shallow waters poses a massive risk that it may break up on its way to land, releasing the contained pollutants into fragile coastal waters. ---> this is saying water is a bad option not land.
(E) The sinking of the platform is fully in line with internationally approved guidelines for the disposal of off shore installations at sea. -> whatever!!
should be A but OA is different.
12 Feb 2016, 10:15
Kudos
Bookmarks
OE by veritas prep
This is a Weaken question, due to the phrase, “which of the following…indicates the plan…is ill-suited.” However, unlike other Weaken questions that focus on arguments containing premises and conclusions, this problem focuses on the steps and goals of a particular plan. Thus, instead of zeroing in on a conclusion (as we normally would if attempting to weaken a traditional argument), we pay special attention to the goal of the plan. The correct answer will show that the proposed solution would not meet the predefined goals. The primary goal of the environmental groups is found in the very first sentence of the question: they want to “protect the environment”. To reach this goal, their plan is to keep a decommissioned oil platform from sinking. Naturally, any answer choice that shows the plan does not “protect the environment” could potentially weaken the efficacy of the solution.
Answer choice “A” uses a fairly common trick of the Testmaker: luring test takers into accepting an “expert opinion” when the evaluatory criteria used by the expert are not explicitly stated. While the expert (in this case, the National Environmental Research Council) may give an official statement, this does not mean that the expert has the same goals or motives as the environmental groups have. “The best practicable environmental option” may or may not protect the environment. Answer choice “A” does not necessarily weaken the plan.
Answer choice “B” is a misdirection answer. Here the Testmaker introduces different criteria than those used by the environmental groups (in this case, the cost of different options.) As compelling as saving millions of dollars may be, the goal of the environmental groups is to “protect the environment” not “save money”. Our goal is to undermine the efficacy of the proposed plan in meeting the proposed goal; whether the plan saves money is irrelevant.
Answer choice “C” is also a misdirection answer. It tries to get novice test takers to focus on other sources of toxic materials irrelevant to the goals of the proposed plan: environmentalists could still protect the environment from the toxic materials released by sinking the oil platform, regardless of the amount of chemicals released by natural phenomena.
(Now, if they could somehow plug an undersea volcano by sinking the oil platform, that would be another story entirely; however, such a possibility is not mentioned here!)
Answer choice “D” shows us how the potential effects of the environmentalists’ plan could actually pose a greater risk to the environment, thus undermining the environmentalists’ goal of “protecting the environment”. Answer choice “D” weakens the plan.
Answer choice “E” is another variation on the “expert opinion” trap used by the Test-maker. Even if the disposal process were “internationally approved” (implying the “okay” of some governing body), this could still come in conflict with the environmentalists’ goals.
This is a Weaken question, due to the phrase, “which of the following…indicates the plan…is ill-suited.” However, unlike other Weaken questions that focus on arguments containing premises and conclusions, this problem focuses on the steps and goals of a particular plan. Thus, instead of zeroing in on a conclusion (as we normally would if attempting to weaken a traditional argument), we pay special attention to the goal of the plan. The correct answer will show that the proposed solution would not meet the predefined goals. The primary goal of the environmental groups is found in the very first sentence of the question: they want to “protect the environment”. To reach this goal, their plan is to keep a decommissioned oil platform from sinking. Naturally, any answer choice that shows the plan does not “protect the environment” could potentially weaken the efficacy of the solution.
Answer choice “A” uses a fairly common trick of the Testmaker: luring test takers into accepting an “expert opinion” when the evaluatory criteria used by the expert are not explicitly stated. While the expert (in this case, the National Environmental Research Council) may give an official statement, this does not mean that the expert has the same goals or motives as the environmental groups have. “The best practicable environmental option” may or may not protect the environment. Answer choice “A” does not necessarily weaken the plan.
Answer choice “B” is a misdirection answer. Here the Testmaker introduces different criteria than those used by the environmental groups (in this case, the cost of different options.) As compelling as saving millions of dollars may be, the goal of the environmental groups is to “protect the environment” not “save money”. Our goal is to undermine the efficacy of the proposed plan in meeting the proposed goal; whether the plan saves money is irrelevant.
Answer choice “C” is also a misdirection answer. It tries to get novice test takers to focus on other sources of toxic materials irrelevant to the goals of the proposed plan: environmentalists could still protect the environment from the toxic materials released by sinking the oil platform, regardless of the amount of chemicals released by natural phenomena.
(Now, if they could somehow plug an undersea volcano by sinking the oil platform, that would be another story entirely; however, such a possibility is not mentioned here!)
Answer choice “D” shows us how the potential effects of the environmentalists’ plan could actually pose a greater risk to the environment, thus undermining the environmentalists’ goal of “protecting the environment”. Answer choice “D” weakens the plan.
Answer choice “E” is another variation on the “expert opinion” trap used by the Test-maker. Even if the disposal process were “internationally approved” (implying the “okay” of some governing body), this could still come in conflict with the environmentalists’ goals.
