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

It is currently 26 Aug 2019, 02:22

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Oceanographer: To substantially reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
CR & LSAT Forum Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Studying for the LSAT -- Corruptus in Extremis
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Posts: 727
Location: United States (MA)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Reviews Badge
Oceanographer: To substantially reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jul 2019, 12:53
1
1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  25% (medium)

Question Stats:

76% (02:07) correct 24% (02:15) wrong based on 223 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Oceanographer: To substantially reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere, carbon dioxide should be captured and pumped deep into the oceans, where it would dissolve. The cool, dense water in ocean depths takes centuries to mix with the warmer water near the surface, so any carbon dioxide pumped deep into oceans would be trapped there for centuries.

Which one of the following is an assumption that the oceanographer's argument requires?

(A) Carbon dioxide will dissolve much more thoroughly if it is pumped into cold water than it will if it is pumped into warmer water

(B) Evaporation of warmer ocean water near an ocean's surface does not generally release into the atmosphere large amounts of carbon dioxide

(C) Carbon dioxide dissolved in cool, dense water in ocean depths will not escape back into Earth's atmosphere a long time before the water in which that carbon dioxide is dissolved mixes with warmer water near the surface

(D) It is the density of the water in the ocean depths that plays the main role in the trapping of the carbon dioxide

(E) Carbon dioxide should be pumped into ocean depths to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere only if the carbon dioxide pumped into ocean depths would be trapped there for hundreds of years

_________________
D-Day: November 18th, 2017

My CR Guide: https://gmatclub.com/forum/mod-nightblade-s-quick-guide-to-proficiency-cr-295316.html

Want to be a moderator? We may want you to be one! See how here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-club-moderators-directory-253455.html

Need a laugh and a break? Go here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/mental-break-funny-videos-270269.html

Need a CR tutor? PM me!
Most Helpful Expert Reply
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2776
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: Oceanographer: To substantially reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Aug 2019, 13:52
1
Vigneshwaran93 wrote:
I had a confusion with C and E, Can you please explain Why E and A is not correct?

Doer01 wrote:
Hi,
Choices except C & E are easy to reject.
I chose C because it seemed just a little bit better than E. E is not bad either.
abhishek893rai E does say that carbon dioxide will remain dissolved hundreds of years and not 99 or 50 years. I am still not convinced by your reasoning. Could you please elaborate your answer a bit more mate?

The question asks for "an assumption that the oceanographer's argument requires," so we are looking for an answer choice that MUST be true in order for the oceanographer's conclusion to hold.

For a quick recap of his/her argument:

Conclusion: "carbon dioxide should be captured and pumped deep into the oceans"

Reasoning behind the conclusion:

  • Cool, dense water takes centuries to mix with warmer waters
  • Therefore, CO2 pumped into the deep water will remain there for centuries
  • Therefore, pumping water deep into the ocean will reduce the amount of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere

Let's take a look at (A):
Quote:
(A) Carbon dioxide will dissolve much more thoroughly if it is pumped into cold water than it will if it is pumped into warmer water

The reasoning in the oceanographer's argument depends on cool, dense water remaining separate from warmer waters -- it does not say anything at all about how thoroughly CO2 dissolves in either type of water. It is entirely possible for CO2 to dissolve equally in both types of water without any impact on the conclusion of the argument. So long as the warm and cold waters do not mix, the CO2 will remain trapped in the cool water and will not enter the earth's atmosphere.

Because (A) does not HAVE to be true for the conclusion to hold, it is not an assumption required by the argument. Eliminate (A).

Quote:
(E) Carbon dioxide should be pumped into ocean depths to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere only if the carbon dioxide pumped into ocean depths would be trapped there for hundreds of years

The oceanographer's stated goal is "to substantially reduce the amount of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere." Notice that there is no timeline on this goal -- as long as CO2 in the atmosphere is substantially reduced, the goal has been met.

According to the passage, the plan he/she proposes happens to keep CO2 trapped in the ocean for hundreds of years, which would meet the intended goal -- but that does not mean that this timeline is REQUIRED by the oceanographer's argument. As abhishek893rai pointed out, what if the CO2 remains trapped for 99 years? Then the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere would be reduced, and the conclusion would hold.

Because the argument does not REQUIRE (E), it is not an assumption on which the argument depends.

I hope that helps!
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations: All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

SC articles & resources: How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

RC, CR, and other articles & resources: All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal
General Discussion
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 19 May 2019
Posts: 6
Re: Oceanographer: To substantially reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jul 2019, 22:48
3
I had a confusion with C and E, Can you please explain Why E and A is not correct?
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 17
CAT Tests
Re: Oceanographer: To substantially reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jul 2019, 02:45
2
E is wrong because what if it stays dissolved for next 50 years or 99 years. Doesn't break the conclusion.
A is wrong because is tells that one medium of dissolution is better than the other.
Try negating option C, it breaks the conclusion.

Posted from my mobile device
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 19 Sep 2017
Posts: 182
Location: United Kingdom
GPA: 3.9
WE: Account Management (Other)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Oceanographer: To substantially reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jul 2019, 05:29
Hi,
Choices except C & E are easy to reject.
I chose C because it seemed just a little bit better than E. E is not bad either.
abhishek893rai E does say that carbon dioxide will remain dissolved hundreds of years and not 99 or 50 years. I am still not convinced by your reasoning. Could you please elaborate your answer a bit more mate?
_________________
Cheers!!

~Whatever one practices, becomes a habit. Make sure you practice the right ones.~
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Oceanographer: To substantially reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in   [#permalink] 29 Jul 2019, 05:29
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Oceanographer: To substantially reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne