Industry's environmental improvement efforts have traditionally focuse

Question

Industry's environmental improvement efforts have traditionally focused on pollution control through identifying, processing, and disposing of discharges or waste. Recently, more progressive companies have embraced the concept of pollution prevention, using such methods as material substitution and closed-loop processes to prevent pollution. Regardless of their approach to dealing with pollution, however, many companies view pollution treatment or control as too expensive. But companies must learn to view environmental improvement in terms of efficient use of resources and to recognize that pollution has “opportunity costs”—wasted resources, wasted effort, and diminished product value for customers.

This view of pollution as resulting from inefficient use of resources evokes the history of the “quality revolution” of the 1980s. Before that revolution, many managers believed that improving product quality was prohibitively expensive because it could be achieved only through additional inspections and reworking of “inevitable” product defects. What lay behind the old view was the assumption that both product design and production processes were unalterable. As a result of the quality revolution, companies now view defects as a sign of inefficient product and process design, not as an inevitable by-product of manufacturing.

Like product defects, industrial pollution often reveals flaws in product design or production processes. Companies can eliminate pollution and follow the basic principles of the quality revolution by using materials more efficiently, by obviating the need for hazardous and hard-to-handle materials, and by eliminating unneeded activities.    1  
1. The term “opportunity costs” as it is used in the passage refers to which of the following?

(A) Costs to the consumer of new product development
(B) Financial ramifications of keeping pollution control costs low 
(C) Opportunities to stop pollution before it begins 
(D) Possibilities lost because of pollution 
(E) Costs to industries of preventing pollution

2 
2. The passage is primarily concerned with

(A) evaluating past solutions to a problem
(B) recommending a new approach to a problem
(C) contrasting the various causes of a problem 
(D) assessing the damage that may be caused by a problem
(E) examining the origins of a misconception about a problem

3 
3. In the context of the passage as a whole, the function of the second paragraph is to

(A) provide an evaluation of the pollution-prevention methods described in the first paragraph
(B) introduce evidence that supports the traditional approach mentioned in the first paragraph
(C) present an analogous situation that helps to explain the position taken in the last paragraph
(D) describe how the principles of the quality revolution have been applied to pollution-prevention methods
(E) explain how the principles underlying the quality revolution have affected pollution-prevention methods

Austindsouza · Answer

Can you please provide the OA to the third question.

glagad · Answer

OA is C for Q3.

The Paragraph 2nd talks about Quality revolution that led to new process of Product Designing and changed the mindset that defects are by-product of inefficient processes. Para 3 talks further about the same idea and explains how the same is applicable for Pollution prevention as well.

Hope that helps.

Alexgmattop · Answer

can somebody tell me why the q3 not choose E

manman3402 · Answer

The question is concerned, why we have mentioned the second paragraph, the para 2 mainly focuses on explaining on how a defect to a product is a cause of inefficiency in the process and design. And then later in 3rd paragraph, the same example is used to position the writer's agenda that pollution control should be viewed as cause of inefficiency in process and design same as a defect is now viewed by the companies.

Alexgmattop

can somebody tell me why the q3 not choose E

Nadezhda1999 · Answer

2. The passage is primarily concerned with

(A) evaluating  past solutions  to a problem: the passage does address/discusses  past  solutions to the issue of pollution, it does not provide any examples.

(B) recommending a new approach to a problem: the passage suggests to use the approach that the company used in improving product quality, which at the beginning has also been perceived as an expensive process. —>  This view of pollution as resulting from inefficient use of resources evokes the history of the “quality revolution” of the 1980s.  You can see that the authors highlights the analogy and implies that the same logic can be used for the problem of pollution.

(C) contrasting the various causes of a problem: causes are discusses - companies perceive it expense, yet it is not the central idea.

(D) assessing the damage that may be caused by a problem - not discusses in the passage.

(E) examining the origins of a misconception about a problem - the passage does not focus on this.

rahul5657 · Answer

Question 1: The term “opportunity costs” as it is used in the passage refers to which of the following?

(A) Costs to the consumer of new product development
(B) Financial ramifications of keeping pollution control costs low
(C) Opportunities to stop pollution before it begins
(D) Possibilities lost because of pollution
(E) Costs to industries of preventing pollution

(A) Incorrect – The passage does not discuss costs of new product development.
(B) Incorrect – The passage states that keeping pollution low can actually save costs, not just have "financial ramifications."
(C) Incorrect – The term "opportunity costs" refers to what is lost due to pollution, not the ability to stop it.
(D)  Correct  – The passage explains that pollution wastes resources and effort, meaning companies lose potential efficiency and value.
(E) Incorrect – The passage does not suggest that preventing pollution itself is an opportunity cost, but rather that pollution leads to losses.

Question 2: The passage is primarily concerned with

(A) evaluating past solutions to a problem
(B) recommending a new approach to a problem
(C) contrasting the various causes of a problem
(D) assessing the damage that may be caused by a problem
(E) examining the origins of a misconception about a problem

(A) Incorrect – The passage is not evaluating past pollution-control solutions, but suggesting a better approach.
(B)  Correct  – The author recommends that companies see pollution as inefficiency and prevent it rather than just control it.
(C) Incorrect – The passage does not contrast causes of pollution, but discusses how to address it more effectively.
(D) Incorrect – The passage is not focused on damage caused by pollution, but on business strategies for dealing with it.
(E) Incorrect – The passage does not focus on misconceptions about pollution, but on a shift in perspective.

Question 3: In the context of the passage as a whole, the function of the second paragraph is to

(A) provide an evaluation of the pollution-prevention methods described in the first paragraph
(B) introduce evidence that supports the traditional approach mentioned in the first paragraph
(C) present an analogous situation that helps to explain the position taken in the last paragraph
(D) describe how the principles of the quality revolution have been applied to pollution-prevention methods
(E) explain how the principles underlying the quality revolution have affected pollution-prevention methods

(A) Incorrect – The second paragraph does not evaluate pollution prevention methods; it draws a comparison to the quality revolution.
(B) Incorrect – The second paragraph does not support the traditional approach (pollution control); instead, it challenges old thinking.
(C)  Correct  – The quality revolution analogy helps explain why pollution should be seen as an efficiency problem, not a necessary cost.
(D) Incorrect – The second paragraph does not describe how the quality revolution applies to pollution prevention, but rather draws a conceptual parallel.
(E) Incorrect – The passage does not discuss how the quality revolution directly impacted pollution prevention, only that the same mindset shift is needed.

Prak0709 · Answer

Can anyone explain how to eliminate E in Q1 ?

guddo · Answer

1. The term “opportunity costs” as it is used in the passage refers to which of the following?

(A) Costs to the consumer of new product development
(B) Financial ramifications of keeping pollution control costs low 
(C) Opportunities to stop pollution before it begins 
(D) Possibilities lost because of pollution 
(E) Costs to industries of preventing pollution

The passage contrasts traditional pollution control with pollution prevention, arguing that companies should view pollution as a sign of inefficient resource use. It draws a parallel to the quality revolution, where defects were re‐seen as design flaws rather than inevitable. Pollution, like defects, indicates wasted resources and lost opportunities.

The passage defines “opportunity costs” of pollution as “wasted resources, wasted effort, and diminished product value for customers”, that is, potential benefits that are lost because resources are used inefficiently. This matches “possibilities lost because of pollution.”

Answer: (D)

guddo · Answer

The passage says “opportunity costs” of pollution are wasted resources, wasted effort, and lost product value, in other words, what is lost because pollution makes things inefficient.

Option E describes the money industries spend to prevent pollution, the cost of equipment, processes, or changes to stop waste. That’s not a lost opportunity, it’s an upfront expense. The passage is talking about the hidden losses pollution creates, not the price tag of stopping it.

So E doesn’t match the definition given.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Hi Prak0709

Read the relevant lines from the passage:

"companies must learn to view environmental improvement in terms of efficient use of resources and to recognize that pollution has “opportunity costs”—wasted resources, wasted effort, and diminished product value for customers".

The term  "opportunity costs"  is explicitly defined as "all things that represent lost potential value because of pollution."

(E)  is incorrect because it is about costs of preventing pollution, not the opportunity cost of having pollution.

Industry's environmental improvement efforts have traditionally focuse

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

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

Industry's environmental improvement efforts have traditionally focuse

Prep Toolkit

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