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.
Nov 1811:00 AM PST
-12:00 PM PST
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 30 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
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. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
16 Apr 2025, 15:36
Kudos
Bookmarks
Agree: LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional light bulbs.
Disagree: LED bulbs are broadly effective for lighting needs, regardless of geographic or sector-specific context.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
25%
(medium)
Question Stats:
78% (01:48) correct
22%
(01:57)
wrong
based on 396
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Leo: Transitioning from traditional light bulbs to LED bulbs can greatly reduce energy consumption and lower electricity bills. Many countries, including Germany, have seen significant improvements in energy efficiency and cost savings by making widespread changes to LED lighting in both residential and commercial sectors — improvements that show how broadly suitable LED technology is for modern lighting needs.
Samantha: While LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional bulbs, they are not the ideal choice for all lighting needs. Their upfront cost can be high, their light quality can vary, and the success of LED adoption in Germany may not apply equally in countries with different energy usage patterns or economic conditions.
Based on the views expressed, select for Agree the statement about which Leo and Samantha would most likely agree, and select for Disagree the statement about which Leo and Samantha would most likely disagree. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Samantha: While LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional bulbs, they are not the ideal choice for all lighting needs. Their upfront cost can be high, their light quality can vary, and the success of LED adoption in Germany may not apply equally in countries with different energy usage patterns or economic conditions.
Based on the views expressed, select for Agree the statement about which Leo and Samantha would most likely agree, and select for Disagree the statement about which Leo and Samantha would most likely disagree. Make only two selections, one in each column.
| Agree | Disagree | |
| LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional light bulbs. | ||
| LED bulbs are cheaper to purchase than traditional bulbs. | ||
| LED bulbs are broadly effective for lighting needs, regardless of geographic or sector-specific context. | ||
| LED bulbs require less frequent replacement than traditional bulbs. | ||
| LED lighting reduces carbon emissions more effectively than other modern clean-energy technologies. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Agree: LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional light bulbs.
Disagree: LED bulbs are broadly effective for lighting needs, regardless of geographic or sector-specific context.
17 May 2025, 01:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
• LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional light bulbs.
Leo says: “Transitioning from traditional light bulbs to LED bulbs can greatly reduce energy consumption...” This directly affirms that LED bulbs are more energy-efficient.
Samantha says: “While LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional bulbs...” She explicitly acknowledges their superior efficiency.
Both speakers clearly affirm this point. This is the statement Leo and Samantha would most likely agree on.
• LED bulbs are cheaper to purchase than traditional bulbs.
Samantha says: “LED bulbs can be expensive to purchase initially...” This directly contradicts the statement, so she would most likely disagree with it.
Leo does not mention the purchase cost of LED bulbs. He talks only about energy consumption and electricity bills, not upfront pricing. Since he is silent on this issue, we cannot determine his position.
Because only one speaker expresses a view and the other is silent, this statement cannot be the correct answer for agreement or disagreement.
• LED bulbs are broadly effective for lighting needs, regardless of geographic or sector-specific context.
Leo says that many countries, including Germany, have seen significant improvements by adopting LED lighting “in both residential and commercial sectors.” This suggests he views LED technology as broadly effective across different contexts.
Samantha says: “They are not the perfect solution for all lighting needs,” and notes concerns about upfront cost, light quality, and differences in energy needs and economic conditions between countries. This shows she would likely disagree with the idea that LEDs are broadly effective regardless of regional or sector-specific variation.
This is the statement Leo and Samantha would most likely disagree about.
• LED bulbs require less frequent replacement than traditional bulbs.
Neither Leo nor Samantha mentions bulb lifespan, durability, or replacement frequency. Leo focuses on energy consumption and cost savings. Samantha raises issues with upfront cost, light quality, and cross-context suitability — but not how long the bulbs last.
Since this topic is not addressed by either speaker, we cannot determine whether they would agree or disagree with the statement.
Therefore, this statement cannot be the correct answer for either column.
• LED lighting reduces carbon emissions more effectively than other modern clean-energy technologies.
Leo discusses reduced energy consumption and lower electricity bills. However, he does not mention carbon emissions or compare LEDs to other clean-energy technologies such as solar, wind, or advanced energy systems.
Samantha focuses on the limitations of LED bulbs, including cost, quality, and contextual suitability, but does not discuss environmental impact or refer to other clean-energy technologies.
Since neither speaker addresses carbon emissions or makes any comparative claims about other clean-energy solutions, this statement cannot be used to determine agreement or disagreement.
Correct answer:
Agree "LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional light bulbs."
Disagree "LED bulbs are broadly effective for lighting needs, regardless of geographic or sector-specific context. "
Bunuel
• LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional light bulbs.
Leo says: “Transitioning from traditional light bulbs to LED bulbs can greatly reduce energy consumption...” This directly affirms that LED bulbs are more energy-efficient.
Samantha says: “While LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional bulbs...” She explicitly acknowledges their superior efficiency.
Both speakers clearly affirm this point. This is the statement Leo and Samantha would most likely agree on.
• LED bulbs are cheaper to purchase than traditional bulbs.
Samantha says: “LED bulbs can be expensive to purchase initially...” This directly contradicts the statement, so she would most likely disagree with it.
Leo does not mention the purchase cost of LED bulbs. He talks only about energy consumption and electricity bills, not upfront pricing. Since he is silent on this issue, we cannot determine his position.
Because only one speaker expresses a view and the other is silent, this statement cannot be the correct answer for agreement or disagreement.
• LED bulbs are broadly effective for lighting needs, regardless of geographic or sector-specific context.
Leo says that many countries, including Germany, have seen significant improvements by adopting LED lighting “in both residential and commercial sectors.” This suggests he views LED technology as broadly effective across different contexts.
Samantha says: “They are not the perfect solution for all lighting needs,” and notes concerns about upfront cost, light quality, and differences in energy needs and economic conditions between countries. This shows she would likely disagree with the idea that LEDs are broadly effective regardless of regional or sector-specific variation.
This is the statement Leo and Samantha would most likely disagree about.
• LED bulbs require less frequent replacement than traditional bulbs.
Neither Leo nor Samantha mentions bulb lifespan, durability, or replacement frequency. Leo focuses on energy consumption and cost savings. Samantha raises issues with upfront cost, light quality, and cross-context suitability — but not how long the bulbs last.
Since this topic is not addressed by either speaker, we cannot determine whether they would agree or disagree with the statement.
Therefore, this statement cannot be the correct answer for either column.
• LED lighting reduces carbon emissions more effectively than other modern clean-energy technologies.
Leo discusses reduced energy consumption and lower electricity bills. However, he does not mention carbon emissions or compare LEDs to other clean-energy technologies such as solar, wind, or advanced energy systems.
Samantha focuses on the limitations of LED bulbs, including cost, quality, and contextual suitability, but does not discuss environmental impact or refer to other clean-energy technologies.
Since neither speaker addresses carbon emissions or makes any comparative claims about other clean-energy solutions, this statement cannot be used to determine agreement or disagreement.
Correct answer:
Agree "LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional light bulbs."
Disagree "LED bulbs are broadly effective for lighting needs, regardless of geographic or sector-specific context. "
13 Jul 2025, 10:46
Kudos
Bookmarks
1. We are asked to find the statements which Leo and Samantha will agree and disagree on.
2. First of all, let's consider two statements:
- "LED bulbs require less frequent replacement than traditional bulbs." Neither person mentions how often each type of bulb is being replaced, so this statement doesn't work.
- "LED lighting reduces carbon emissions more effectively than other modern clean-energy technologies." Neither person mentions other modern clean-energy technologies, so this statement doesn't work.
3. Now we can consider all the other statements:
- "LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional light bulbs." Leo supports this by saying, "significant improvements in energy efficiency ... by making widespread changes to LED lighting." Samantha agrees by stating that, "LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional bulbs." So, this statement is an agreement.
- "LED bulbs are cheaper to purchase than traditional bulbs." Samantha disagrees because when comparing the two, she says that for LED bulbs, "their upfront cost can be high." However, the direct cost isn't mentioned by Leo. So, this statement is neither.
- "LED bulbs are broadly effective for lighting needs, regardless of geographic or sector-specific context." Leo agrees, stating, "improvements that show how broadly suitable LED technology is for modern lighting needs." On the other hand, Samantha disagrees by saying, "may not apply equally in countries with different energy usage patterns or economic conditions." So, this statement is a disagreement.
4. Our answer will be: Agree - LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional light bulbs and Disagree - LED bulbs are broadly effective for lighting needs, regardless of geographic or sector-specific context.
2. First of all, let's consider two statements:
- "LED bulbs require less frequent replacement than traditional bulbs." Neither person mentions how often each type of bulb is being replaced, so this statement doesn't work.
- "LED lighting reduces carbon emissions more effectively than other modern clean-energy technologies." Neither person mentions other modern clean-energy technologies, so this statement doesn't work.
3. Now we can consider all the other statements:
- "LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional light bulbs." Leo supports this by saying, "significant improvements in energy efficiency ... by making widespread changes to LED lighting." Samantha agrees by stating that, "LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional bulbs." So, this statement is an agreement.
- "LED bulbs are cheaper to purchase than traditional bulbs." Samantha disagrees because when comparing the two, she says that for LED bulbs, "their upfront cost can be high." However, the direct cost isn't mentioned by Leo. So, this statement is neither.
- "LED bulbs are broadly effective for lighting needs, regardless of geographic or sector-specific context." Leo agrees, stating, "improvements that show how broadly suitable LED technology is for modern lighting needs." On the other hand, Samantha disagrees by saying, "may not apply equally in countries with different energy usage patterns or economic conditions." So, this statement is a disagreement.
4. Our answer will be: Agree - LED bulbs are more energy-efficient than traditional light bulbs and Disagree - LED bulbs are broadly effective for lighting needs, regardless of geographic or sector-specific context.
