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!
13 Apr 2022, 01:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
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:
84% (01:26) correct
16%
(01:47)
wrong
based on 158
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Lawmakers who back conservation efforts, which represent a threat to the bottom lines of the fossil fuel industry, particularly coal, the nation’s top source of carbon pollution, have been criticized by right wing groups and organizations such as Alliance for America.
A. industry, particularly coal, the nation’s top source of carbon pollution, have been criticized
B. industry and coal in particular, which is the nation’s top source of carbon pollution, has been criticized
C. industry with coal in particular, the nation’s top source of carbon pollution, and have been criticized
D. industry, with coal being the nation’s top source of carbon pollution, have been criticized
E. industry, particularly coal, which is the nation’s top source of carbon pollution, has been criticized
A. industry, particularly coal, the nation’s top source of carbon pollution, have been criticized
B. industry and coal in particular, which is the nation’s top source of carbon pollution, has been criticized
C. industry with coal in particular, the nation’s top source of carbon pollution, and have been criticized
D. industry, with coal being the nation’s top source of carbon pollution, have been criticized
E. industry, particularly coal, which is the nation’s top source of carbon pollution, has been criticized
13 Apr 2022, 03:56
Kudos
Bookmarks
My answer is (A). It took me 01:12.
(A) "particularly coal" should mean "particularly coal industry". Can we say "coal industry is the nation's top source of carbon pollution"? I believe so. Keep for now.
(B) Subject ("lawmakers") is plural, but verb ("has been") is singular.
(C) Not a sentence. Its basic structure is: Lawmakers and have been criticized.
(D) While I do not automatically eliminate any answer with "with" or with "being", their usages should be well justified.
In (D), it is not clear what "with coal being the nation’s top source of carbon pollution" tries to modify.
In addition, the sentence can be comically interpreted to mean "Lawmakers (who back conservation efforts) together with coal" are the subject of criticism. (Note that this argument can be applied to almost all the use of "with", including decent ones. Still, it shows the potential issue with "with", and partly explain why so many answers with "with" are incorrect.)
(E) See (B).
(A) "particularly coal" should mean "particularly coal industry". Can we say "coal industry is the nation's top source of carbon pollution"? I believe so. Keep for now.
(B) Subject ("lawmakers") is plural, but verb ("has been") is singular.
(C) Not a sentence. Its basic structure is: Lawmakers and have been criticized.
(D) While I do not automatically eliminate any answer with "with" or with "being", their usages should be well justified.
In (D), it is not clear what "with coal being the nation’s top source of carbon pollution" tries to modify.
In addition, the sentence can be comically interpreted to mean "Lawmakers (who back conservation efforts) together with coal" are the subject of criticism. (Note that this argument can be applied to almost all the use of "with", including decent ones. Still, it shows the potential issue with "with", and partly explain why so many answers with "with" are incorrect.)
(E) See (B).
