Bunuel wrote:
Newspaper article from 2007: The use of ethanol as a fuel supplement is expected to increase sharply in the next few years. In the United States, ethanol is produced primarily from maize-the principal ingredient in most cattle feed. And the increased demand for maize will raise its price. So unless another crop becomes the primary source of ethanol, the cost of cattle feed may be expected to increase considerably.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the above argument?
A. The increased demand for ethanol will benefit disproportionately those regions of the United States where maize is grown.
B. The principal byproduct of ethanol production from maize is an excellent source of cattle feed.
C. Farmers could recover most of their increased feed costs by raising beef and milk prices.
D. Increased use of ethanol as a fuel supplement will reduce the overall demand for gasoline that is not supplemented with ethanol.
E. Farmers can shift to other areas of agriculture if the cost of raising cattle increases.
Conclusion of the argument : Unless another crop becomes the primary source of ethanol, the cost of cattle feed may be expected to increase
considerably.
The Story: use of ethanol as a fuel supplement is expected to increase
sharply in the next few years → ethanol is produced primarily from maize-the principal ingredient in most cattle feed → increased demand for maize will raise its price
So the author assumes that no other source will serve as cattle feed and substitute the increase in demand for maize.
We have to weaken the conclusion.
Answer choice elimination:
A. The increased demand for ethanol will benefit disproportionately those regions of the United States where maize is grown.The conclusion is not about whether the increase in demand for ethanol will benefit the farmers. We have to weaken the conclusion that the increase in demand for ethanol will lead to an increase in the cost of cattle feed.
B. The principal byproduct of ethanol production from maize is an excellent source of cattle feed.We can keep this option.
The option provides us with additional information that tells us that maize may not be the ONLY source of cattle feed. Hence, even if the demand for maize may sharply in the next few years, the byproduct of ethanol production from maize can serve as cattle feed. Hence, the price of maize might not increase as the author expects.
This information weakens the conclusion.
C. Farmers could recover most of their increased feed costs by raising beef and milk prices.This option is a trap one. The conclusion is not that farmers will experience loss because of increased costs. The conclusion of the argument is that the farmers the cost of cattle feed may be expected to increase considerably. Hence, whether the farmers are able to compensate for the increase by other means is not relevant and doesn't weaken the conclusion. We can eliminate C.
D. Increased use of ethanol as a fuel supplement will reduce the overall demand for gasoline that is not supplemented with ethanol.Doesn't impact the conclusion of the argument. The argument is primarily around the effect that the increase in demand for maize will have on the cost of cattle feed. We can eliminate this option.
E. Farmers can shift to other areas of agriculture if the cost of raising cattle increases.Similar to option C. We can eliminate this option.
Option B