Industry's environmental improvement efforts have traditionally focuse

GMATNinja can you help explain question 3?

can somebody tell me why the q3 not choose E

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.

Can you please provide the OA explanation for Q1 and Q2.

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.

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.