Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack
GMAT Club

 It is currently 24 Mar 2017, 09:01

### 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

# Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 09 Sep 2004
Posts: 54
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 132 [11] , given: 0

Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2004, 05:52
11
KUDOS
73
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

61% (02:30) correct 39% (01:47) wrong based on 4138 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services was incinerated. This incineration generated a large quantity of residual ash. In order to reduce the amount of residual ash Shelbyville generates this year to half of last year's total, the city has revamped its collection program. This year city services will separate for recycling enough refuse to reduce the number of truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to half of last year's number.

Which of the following is required for the revamped collection program to achieve its aim?

(A) This year, no materials that city services could separate for recycling will be incinerated.
(B) Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose of the residual ash.
(C) Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year.
(D) The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residual ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year.
(E) The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city service's this year will be no greater than that collected last year.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by Engr2012 on 02 Aug 2015, 11:40, edited 3 times in total.
If you have any questions
New!
VP
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1471
Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 188 [2] , given: 13

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2004, 09:55
2
KUDOS
Will for D as well. I debated with myself whether A was right. However I discounted A because I reasoned that we don't have any info on how much ash the recyclable materials would produce. Also, I think the very reason why the recyclable materials are being separated because they are NOT to be incinerated. So there's no reason to assume they would be.

Can somebody enlighten me if this reasoning for eliminating A sounds ok?

Thanks
Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Posts: 393
Location: Bangalore, India
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2004, 11:35
I think B is the answer.

If the idea is to achieve the goal, then the cost has to remain the same while reducing the amount of residue ash Shelbyville generates this year to half of last yearâ€™s total. If the cost in doing so goes up enormously, I donot think that it is a success.

B exactly does what is required.If B is true, then less than half for separation of the recyclable materials and the remaining for the incinerating. So,the cost remains the same in both the cases and the aim is achieved.

A - 'not incinerating' does not make sense
C - 'refuse'.Idea is not to achieve the goal somehow.
D - If both residues(last year's and this year's) are equal, the the aim is not achieved.
E - does not talk about 'recycling'

Awaiting OA. Do correct me too if necessary.

mba4me wrote:
Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services was incinerated. This incineration generated a large quantity of residue ash. In order to reduce the amount of residue ash Shelbyville generates this year to half of last yearâ€™s total, the city has revamped its collection program. This year city services will separate for recycling enough refuse to reduce the number of truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to half of last yearâ€™s number.

Which of the following is required for the revamped collection program to achieve its aim?

A. This year, no materials that city services could separate for recycling will be incinerated.
B. Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose of the residue ash.
C. Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year.
D. The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residue ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year.
E. The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city services this year will be no greater than that collected last year.

_________________

Awaiting response,

Thnx & Rgds,
Chandra

Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 96
Location: Santa Clara
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2004, 11:58
dwivedys, i think you are right. I got stuck with 'A' but there is no way of knowing how much. THe only other one that makes sense is D. The cost is out of scope according to me...their goal is to reduce the amt. of ash...without any attention to cost.
_________________

"Do or do not, there is no try."
-Yoda

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4302
Followers: 41

Kudos [?]: 448 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2004, 16:23
I think it's C
You need to have more refuse to recycle to be able reduce residue ash

B) all we need is reduce the residue ash nothwithstanding the cost involved
D) even though the residue ash/truck load is doubled, we could still recycle 80% of refuse and the goal would be achieved
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5061
Location: Singapore
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 370 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2004, 19:22
Program's success relies heavily on the materials that are incinerated. There must be at least half that can be recylced.

A. This year, no materials that city services could separate for recycling will be incinerated.
This doesn't helps us to know if this amount of recycled material is at least half of the refuse. A is out.

B. Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated
will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose
of the residue ash.

Cost is not a concern here. B is out.

C. Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year.

Exactly what we needed. C it is.

D. The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residue ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year.

That still doesn't reduce the residual ash by 1/2. Also, it doesn't say that reduction is achieved through recycling some of the refuse. D is out.

E. The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city services this year will be no greater than that collected last year.

Same thing as D. E is out.
Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Posts: 393
Location: Bangalore, India
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2004, 20:37
Yes.. B is clearly out of scope as 'cost' was never a concern at all in the stem.

mallelac wrote:
I think B is the answer.

If the idea is to achieve the goal, then the cost has to remain the same while reducing the amount of residue ash Shelbyville generates this year to half of last year’s total. If the cost in doing so goes up enormously, I donot think that it is a success.

B exactly does what is required.If B is true, then less than half for separation of the recyclable materials and the remaining for the incinerating. So,the cost remains the same in both the cases and the aim is achieved.

A - 'not incinerating' does not make sense
C - 'refuse'.Idea is not to achieve the goal somehow.
D - If both residues(last year's and this year's) are equal, the the aim is not achieved.
E - does not talk about 'recycling'

Awaiting OA. Do correct me too if necessary.

mba4me wrote:
Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services was incinerated. This incineration generated a large quantity of residue ash. In order to reduce the amount of residue ash Shelbyville generates this year to half of last year’s total, the city has revamped its collection program. This year city services will separate for recycling enough refuse to reduce the number of truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to half of last year’s number.

Which of the following is required for the revamped collection program to achieve its aim?

A. This year, no materials that city services could separate for recycling will be incinerated.
B. Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose of the residue ash.
C. Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year.
D. The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residue ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year.
E. The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city services this year will be no greater than that collected last year.

_________________

Awaiting response,

Thnx & Rgds,
Chandra

Director
Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 609
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 127 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2004, 03:52
D for me too.

B deals with scope and is out of scope, trying to confuse us withthe 1/2 ratio
C we do not know what was this recyclable proportion last year so it is impossible to conclude anything. If the stem would have been : recyclable ratio increased so that half of what was burnt is now recyclable it would be better...
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1218
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 646 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2005, 07:11
Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services was incinerated. This incineration generated a large quantity of residue ash. In order to reduce the amount of residue ash Shelbyville generates this year to half of last yearâ€™s total, the city has revamped its collection program. This year city services will separate for recycling enough refuse to reduce the number of truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to half of last yearâ€™s number.

Which of the following is required for the revamped collection program to achieve its aim?

A. This year, no materials that city services could separate for recycling will be incinerated.

B. Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose of the residue ash.

C. Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year.

D. The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residue ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year.

E. The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city services this year will be no greater than that collected last year.
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 284
Location: Germany
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 35 [11] , given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2005, 08:35
11
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
I'll go with (D)

Examining the stem:

Last year:
All refuse (collected in N truckloads) --- incinerated ---> residue ash

This year:
All refuse --- separate for recycling ---> refuse to be incinerated (resulting in half the previous year's truckloads N/2) ---- incinerate this left over refuse ----> residue ash (which is half the last year's quantity)

Therefore, this year only half the amount of residue is being incinerated. So, unless each truckload generates less residue ash than it did last year, the objective cannot be achieved.
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1218
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 646 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2005, 09:26
maaverick, thanks for your perfect explanation.

The OA is D.

err... could you explain why C is wrong?

Thank you.
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 284
Location: Germany
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2005, 09:29
chunjuwu wrote:
maaverick, thanks for your perfect explanation.

The OA is D.

err... could you explain why C is wrong?

Thank you.

You're most welcome and I'm glad I could be of help!

(C) is wrong in the following sense:

"Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year" - sure, but by what factor? Unless we have a factor indicating how much the recyclable refuse had increased by, we cannot be sure that the residue ash would decrease by half this year.
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1218
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 646 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2005, 09:49
Thanks.

The key is half of the ash. right?
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 334 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2005, 09:49
A. This year, no materials that city services could separate for recycling will be incinerated.
This is good, but not necessary. If there are more than half that can be recycled, some could be incinerated and still the half incinartion goal is achieved.

B. Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose of the residue ash.
Nobody is talking about costs here.

C. Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year.
We really don't know what they will collect.

D. The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residue ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year.
Yes. We want half of the residuals to come from half of the incinerations, that would mean each truck load cannot generate more ash than before.

E. The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city services this year will be no greater than that collected last year.
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 284
Location: Germany
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2005, 09:51
chunjuwu wrote:
Thanks.

The key is half of the ash. right?

Spot on! The key is half the ash
SVP
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 1702
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 142 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jan 2006, 23:11
Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services was incinerated. This incineration generated a large quantity of residue ash. In order to reduce the amount of residue ash Shelbyville generates this year to half of last yearâ€™s total, the city has revamped its collection program. This year city services will separate for recycling enough refuse to reduce the number of truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to half of last yearâ€™s number.

Which of the following is required for the revamped collection program to achieve its aim?

A. This year, no materials that city services could separate for recycling will be incinerated.

B. Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose of the residue ash.

C. Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year.

D. The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residue ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year.

E. The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city services this year will be no greater than that collected last year.

One more retired Q!
VP
Joined: 06 Jun 2004
Posts: 1059
Location: CA
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 153 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jan 2006, 23:47
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
A. This year, no materials that city services could separate for recycling will be incinerated. Makes sense but not required for the collection to work. If more than half are not recycled ==> More than half are incinerated ==> more residue ash

B. Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose of the residue ash. Costs are not mentioned in the stem

C. Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year. We don't know that. Out of scope

D. The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residue ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year. Correct! This must be required in order for the revamped program to work!!!

E. The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city services this year will be no greater than that collected last year. Not required
_________________

Don't be afraid to take a flying leap of faith.. If you risk nothing, than you gain nothing...

CEO
Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 2909
Schools: Completed at SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - Class of 2008
Followers: 25

Kudos [?]: 279 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jan 2006, 00:34
I think C.

For revamped collection program to work, the truck loads of material to be incinerated should be less.

More recyclable waste ------> Less waste to be incinerated -----> Less residue ash.
_________________

SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - MBA CLASS OF 2008

Director
Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Posts: 548
Location: Germany
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jan 2006, 09:28
C is out because it refers only to proportion not to the total quantity.

should be D
Current Student
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 5237
Followers: 26

Kudos [?]: 393 [0], given: 0

Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jan 2006, 22:04
Negate (D) and the author`s argument falls apart.
Re: Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services   [#permalink] 26 Jan 2006, 22:04

Go to page    1   2   3   4   5    Next  [ 87 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services 0 06 Mar 2013, 10:26
Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city /services 0 16 Feb 2013, 04:25
2 Last year, construction in the city of Vonter, including the 5 17 Jan 2012, 23:13
Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services 0 08 Nov 2012, 00:15
Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city /services 0 28 Oct 2012, 17:24
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services

 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®.