GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 11 Dec 2019, 22:20

### 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

# Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1401
Location: NewJersey USA
Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2004, 20:33
5
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

41% (02:25) correct 59% (02:21) wrong based on 90 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

11. Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth forests for use in manufacture can reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, since when large old trees die in the forest they decompose., releasing their stored carbon dioxide. Harvesting old-growth forests would, moreover, make room for rapidly growing young trees, which absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than do trees in old-growth forests.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the official's argument?

(A) Many old-growth forests are the home of thousands of animal species that would be endangered if the forests were to be destroyed.

(B) Much of the organic matter from old-growth trees, unusable as lumber, is made into products that decompose rapidly.

(C) A young tree contains less than half the amount of carbon dioxide that is stored in an old tree of the same species.

(D) Much of the carbon dioxide present in forests is eventually released when wood and other organic debris found on the forest floor decompose.

(E) It can take many years for the trees of a newly planted forest to reach the size of those found in existing old-growth forests.
CEO
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 3333
Re: Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2004, 21:33
1
I stand by C because if young trees absorb only half the amount that old trees do, then the amount released by those old trees could not be totally absorbed by younger trees thus resulting in an increase in the amount of carbon dioxide in the air
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 May 2003
Posts: 371
Location: Aus
Re: Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2004, 21:35
I thought containing CO2 is different from absorbing.
CEO
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 3333
Re: Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2004, 21:42
But if it can only contain less than half the old tree's amount of CO2, then even though it absorbs CO2, it will not be able to absorb the amount released by the old trees...
VP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1401
Location: NewJersey USA
Re: Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2004, 23:00
I answer is B. I didnt like any of the answers very much. I ended up choosing A because of the phrase "which of the following if true"

I guess the B says the old trees are usless because most of the organic material is unsuable as lumbar. ( what an assumption ) The testmakers also need to know that trees are used for making paper and not just as lumbar. In that case B falls apart. The organic material might as well serve as wood pulp for making paper. The argument just uses word manufacture. It could mean anything.

Looks like stoolfi, praetorian123, dj are sleeping. stoolfi might avoid me because I press for explainations.
CEO
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3142
Re: Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jan 2004, 00:24
anandnk wrote:
11. Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth forests for use in manufacture can reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, since when large old trees die in the forest they decompose., releasing their stored carbon dioxide. Harvesting old-growth forests would, moreover, make room for rapidly growing young trees, which absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than do trees in old-growth forests.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the official's argument?

(A) Many old-growth forests are the home of thousands of animal species that would be endangered if the forests were to be destroyed.

(B) Much of the organic matter from old-growth trees, unusable as lumber, is made into products that decompose rapidly.

(C) A young tree contains less than half the amount of carbon dioxide that is stored in an old tree of the same species.

(D) Much of the carbon dioxide present in forests is eventually released when wood and other organic debris found on the forest floor decompose.

(E) It can take many years for the trees of a newly planted forest to reach the size of those found in existing old-growth forests.

B is best...if the unused lumber is going to decompose anyway..whats the point of cutting the old trees in the first place?

A is out of scope
C supports the argument...if less Carbon is contained in young trees, it supports the cutting of old trees to be replaced by young trees.
D...supports the argument
E..doesnt matter if it takes a year or ten years...its out of scope
VP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1401
Location: NewJersey USA
Re: Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jan 2004, 07:08
It is not unusable lumber. It is unusable as lumbar. I think there is a big difference between these two sentences.
Intern
Joined: 22 Apr 2014
Posts: 8
Re: Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Apr 2016, 06:52
I am leaning more towards B, but i'm not sure about it.
CR & LSAT Forum Moderator
Status: He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Studying for the LSAT -- Corruptus in Extremis
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Posts: 868
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Re: Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Nov 2019, 07:05
OA added and bumping for further discussion
_________________
D-Day: November 18th, 2017

My CR Guide: Here
My RC Guide: Here
Want to be a moderator? We may want you to be one! See how: Here
Intern
Joined: 06 Aug 2018
Posts: 38
GMAT 1: 600 Q43 V30
Re: Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2019, 20:21
Praetorian wrote:
anandnk wrote:
11. Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth forests for use in manufacture can reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, since when large old trees die in the forest they decompose., releasing their stored carbon dioxide. Harvesting old-growth forests would, moreover, make room for rapidly growing young trees, which absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than do trees in old-growth forests.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the official's argument?

(A) Many old-growth forests are the home of thousands of animal species that would be endangered if the forests were to be destroyed.

(B) Much of the organic matter from old-growth trees, unusable as lumber, is made into products that decompose rapidly.

(C) A young tree contains less than half the amount of carbon dioxide that is stored in an old tree of the same species.

(D) Much of the carbon dioxide present in forests is eventually released when wood and other organic debris found on the forest floor decompose.

(E) It can take many years for the trees of a newly planted forest to reach the size of those found in existing old-growth forests.

B is best...if the unused lumber is going to decompose anyway..whats the point of cutting the old trees in the first place?

A is out of scope
C supports the argument...if less Carbon is contained in young trees, it supports the cutting of old trees to be replaced by young trees.
D...supports the argument
E..doesnt matter if it takes a year or ten years...its out of scope

Although most of the points have been covered above, We can eliminate C, which is the most debatable one, on the basis of two things.
Firstly We are given that new trees soak up more CO2 from the environment than old trees soak up, we should not be concerned what the tress do with the CO2, maybe they make food out of it, maybe they utilize it in some other way.

Secondly Why should we assume that new trees that would replace the Old forest trees will be of same species.

Hope this is of some help
Intern
Joined: 13 Jun 2018
Posts: 25
Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Dec 2019, 02:39
anandnk wrote:
11. Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth forests for use in manufacture can reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, since when large old trees die in the forest they decompose., releasing their stored carbon dioxide. Harvesting old-growth forests would, moreover, make room for rapidly growing young trees, which absorb more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere than do trees in old-growth forests.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the official's argument?

(A) Many old-growth forests are the home of thousands of animal species that would be endangered if the forests were to be destroyed.

(B) Much of the organic matter from old-growth trees, unusable as lumber, is made into products that decompose rapidly.

(C) A young tree contains less than half the amount of carbon dioxide that is stored in an old tree of the same species.

(D) Much of the carbon dioxide present in forests is eventually released when wood and other organic debris found on the forest floor decompose.

(E) It can take many years for the trees of a newly planted forest to reach the size of those found in existing old-growth forests.

if b is true that means if organic matter cannot be used as lumber and will decay(bcoz it is made into products that decompose rapidly). but it was gonna decay in the forest anyway(but some matter would be used as lumber).

if c is true that means that the young trees will contain only half co2 as that of old trees so there is no benefit in harvesting the old ones.
Logging industry official: Harvesting trees from old-growth   [#permalink] 05 Dec 2019, 02:39
Display posts from previous: Sort by