Last visit was: 14 Jul 2024, 06:39 It is currently 14 Jul 2024, 06:39
Toolkit
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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

# Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escap

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Director
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 649
Own Kudos [?]: 1600 [158]
Given Kudos: 0
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6979
Own Kudos [?]: 64494 [54]
Given Kudos: 1819
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Retired Moderator
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 1258
Own Kudos [?]: 5691 [21]
Given Kudos: 416
General Discussion
Director
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 617
Own Kudos [?]: 2928 [4]
Given Kudos: 0
Re: Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escap [#permalink]
2
Kudos
2
Bookmarks
x97agarwal wrote:
Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escape of heat into space. So emission of these “greenhouse” gases contributes to global warming. In order to reduce global warming, emission of greenhouse gases needs to be reduced. Therefore, the methane now emitted from open landfills should instead be burned to produce electricity.
Objection: The burning of methane generates carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere.

Which of the following, if true, most adequately counters the objection made to the proposal?

A. Every time a human being or other mammal exhales, there is some carbon dioxide released into the air. -> irrelevant
B. The conversion of methane to electricity would occur at a considerable distance from the landfills. -> irelevant
C. The methane that is used to generate electricity would generally be used as a substitute for a fuel that does not produce any greenhouse gases when burned. -> this strengthens the objection saying methane should not be burnt
D. Methane in the atmosphere is more effective in blocking the escape of heat from the Earth than is carbon dioxide. -> this counters most effectively saying that CO2 is less effective than methane in releasing greenhouse gases
E. The amount of methane emitted from the landfills could be reduced if the materials whose decomposition produces methane were not discarded, but recycled. -> irrelevant
IIM School Moderator
Joined: 04 Sep 2016
Posts: 1253
Own Kudos [?]: 1265 [0]
Given Kudos: 1207
Location: India
WE:Engineering (Other)
Re: Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escap [#permalink]

Please validate my reasoning for (C)
Quote:
Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escape of heat into space. So emission of these “greenhouse” gases contributes to global warming. In order to reduce global warming, emission of greenhouse gases needs to be reduced. Therefore, the methane now emitted from open landfills should instead be burned to produce electricity.

Conclusion: M to be burned instead of simply releasing it into atmosphere
since
this gas along with Co2 (Carbon dioxide) causes the temperature to rise

Imagine above to be Person A's claim:

Claim: The burning of methane generates carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere.

Person B objects: No, burning M will cause more CO2 and hence more temperature will rise.

Quote:
Which of the following, if true, most adequately counters the objection made to the proposal?

I need to weaken B's claim:

Quote:
C. The methane that is used to generate electricity would generally be used as a substitute for a fuel that does not produce any greenhouse gases when burned.

Here is how I broke it:
The methane
that is used to generate electricity would generally be used as a substitute for a fuel
that does not produce any greenhouse gases when burned.

So basically in more common usage, methane that was used to generate electricity in now
used as a fuel. The characteristics of this fuel is that: it does not generate any gases that lead to global warming.

Crux: Substitute methane for electricity with methane for fuel -> Fewer greenhouse gases and hence less temp will rise.

OR

Could I have taken help of SC for grammar tense of would (if unsure) from is used, and when burned

Since now it implies:

Currently, the methane that is used to generate electricity WOULD BE USED (in past tense; to align parallelism with past tense:
burned)

So in past, we were using fuels that DID NOT generate GH gases , but now we are using substituting fuel with methane which
causes global warming and hence this is opposite answer.
Intern
Joined: 28 Jan 2019
Posts: 34
Own Kudos [?]: 17 [0]
Given Kudos: 20
GMAT 1: 480 Q48 V14
Re: Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escap [#permalink]
Can anyone please let explain why option "c " is wrong....

If burning of meyhane doesn't produce any green house gas than objection that methane not to be burn get weaken ....

So y not "c " is correct ...

Posted from my mobile device
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Posts: 6979
Own Kudos [?]: 64494 [0]
Given Kudos: 1819
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escap [#permalink]
rakeshtewatia0105 wrote:
Can anyone please let explain why option "c " is wrong....

If burning of meyhane doesn't produce any green house gas than objection that methane not to be burn get weaken ....

So y not "c " is correct ...

Posted from my mobile device

There is an explanation for why (C) is incorrect in this post, take a look and let us know if you have any other questions!
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Posts: 4918
Own Kudos [?]: 7799 [2]
Given Kudos: 220
Location: India
Re: Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escap [#permalink]
2
Kudos
Top Contributor
Let’s understand the argument and the objection first.

1) Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escape of heat into space.
2) So emission of these “greenhouse” gases contributes to global warming.
3) In order to reduce global warming, the emission of greenhouse gases needs to be reduced.

Proposal/ Conclusion- Therefore, the methane now emitted from open landfills should instead be burned to produce electricity.

Objection/Counter conclusion- The burning of methane generates carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere.

We need to find an option that weakens the objection to the proposal.

(A) Every time a human being or other mammal exhales, there is some carbon dioxide released into the air.

The objection is against burning methane as burning methane generates carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere. Option A is irrelevant to the conclusion as well as the counter conclusion- Eliminate A

(B) The conversion of methane to electricity would occur at a considerable distance from the landfills.

It doesn’t matter where the conversion occurs. Eliminate B

(C) The methane that is used to generate electricity would generally be used as a substitute for a fuel that does not produce any greenhouse gases when burned.

The objection is that the burning of methane generates carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere.
This option does not go against the objection of burning methane. It only tells us that the methane that is used to generate electricity would generally be used as a substitute for a fuel that does not produce any greenhouse gases when burned. This supports the objection and is hence incorrect.

(D) Methane in the atmosphere is more effective in blocking the escape of heat from the Earth than is carbon dioxide.

Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escape of heat into space, causing global warming.
Objection- the burning of methane generates more carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere

D says that Methane in the atmosphere is more effective in blocking the escape of heat from the Earth than is carbon dioxide.
This means that Methane in the atmosphere is more harmful than is CO2 as methane contributes more to global warming than CO2 does. Hence burning Methane (even if it generates C02) is better than leaving the methane in the atmosphere. Hence option D is correct

(E) The amount of methane emitted from the landfills could be reduced if the materials whose decomposition produces methane were not discarded, but recycled.

This is totally irrelevant to the argument and the objection. Hence incorrect.

Vishnupriya
CrackVerbal Prep Team
Manager
Joined: 08 Jun 2021
Status:In learning mode...
Posts: 156
Own Kudos [?]: 8 [0]
Given Kudos: 217
Location: India
GMAT 1: 600 Q46 V27
Re: Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escap [#permalink]
hello experts,
I chose C, I thought "that" is referring to substitute when i read it for the first time.
It really is hard to catch because logically that can modify- substitute and fuel and changes the meaning completly.
How to spot this? why did I do this mistake?
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
Posts: 3480
Own Kudos [?]: 5205 [2]
Given Kudos: 1431
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Re: Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escap [#permalink]
2
Kudos
dcoolguy wrote:
hello experts,
I chose C, I thought "that" is referring to substitute when i read it for the first time.
It really is hard to catch because logically that can modify- substitute and fuel and changes the meaning completly.
How to spot this? why did I do this mistake?

Notice that the objection is the following:

Objection: The burning of methane generates carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere.

Reading that, we see that, when methane is burned, it produces the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide.

Thus, it can't be the case that the methane that is used to generate electricity would be used as a substitute that does not produce any greenhouse gases when burned.

So, a great to way to avoid making that error is to be clear about the details of the objection.

Being careful and noticing details are key aspects of CR success.
Manager
Joined: 08 Jun 2021
Status:In learning mode...
Posts: 156
Own Kudos [?]: 8 [0]
Given Kudos: 217
Location: India
GMAT 1: 600 Q46 V27
Re: Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escap [#permalink]
MartyTargetTestPrep wrote:
dcoolguy wrote:
hello experts,
I chose C, I thought "that" is referring to substitute when i read it for the first time.
It really is hard to catch because logically that can modify- substitute and fuel and changes the meaning completly.
How to spot this? why did I do this mistake?

Notice that the objection is the following:

Objection: The burning of methane generates carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere.

Reading that, we see that, when methane is burned, it produces the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide.

Thus, it can't be the case that the methane that is used to generate electricity would be used as a substitute that does not produce any greenhouse gases when burned.

So, a great to way to avoid making that error is to be clear about the details of the objection.

Being careful and noticing details are key aspects of CR success.

Thank you.
just wanted to make sure,
So, what you mean is that details/facts/premise, which are already stated can't be wrong or doubted again when we come down to choices.
Objection that The burning of methane generates carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere. - should always be considered as fact. therefore any choice that restates it or goes against it will be useless. hence, "that" can't refer to substitute.

we shouldn't doubt details or facts, just like the objection was a fact here, right?
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
Posts: 3480
Own Kudos [?]: 5205 [2]
Given Kudos: 1431
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Re: Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escap [#permalink]
2
Kudos
dcoolguy wrote:
MartyTargetTestPrep wrote:
dcoolguy wrote:
hello experts,
I chose C, I thought "that" is referring to substitute when i read it for the first time.
It really is hard to catch because logically that can modify- substitute and fuel and changes the meaning completly.
How to spot this? why did I do this mistake?

Notice that the objection is the following:

Objection: The burning of methane generates carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere.

Reading that, we see that, when methane is burned, it produces the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide.

Thus, it can't be the case that the methane that is used to generate electricity would be used as a substitute that does not produce any greenhouse gases when burned.

So, a great to way to avoid making that error is to be clear about the details of the objection.

Being careful and noticing details are key aspects of CR success.

Thank you.
just wanted to make sure,
So, what you mean is that details/facts/premise, which are already stated can't be wrong or doubted again when we come down to choices.
Objection that The burning of methane generates carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere. - should always be considered as fact. therefore any choice that restates it or goes against it will be useless. hence, "that" can't refer to substitute.

we shouldn't doubt details or facts, just like the objection was a fact here, right?

Right, what's stated in the prompt as factual is considered fact.

So, if you think a choice conflicts with what's stated in the prompt, then either you have misread the choice, what the prompt says is not meant to be taken as factual for some reason (such as that it's a conclusion or opinion rather than a fact), or the question is busted, an unlikely scenario if you are dealing with an official question.
Scoreleap Test Prep Representative
Joined: 17 Jun 2022
Posts: 5
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Location: India
Re: Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escap [#permalink]
bkk145 wrote:
Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escape of heat into space. So emission of these “greenhouse” gases contributes to global warming. In order to reduce global warming, emission of greenhouse gases needs to be reduced. Therefore, the methane now emitted from open landfills should instead be burned to produce electricity.

Objection: The burning of methane generates carbon dioxide that is released into the atmosphere.

Which of the following, if true, most adequately counters the objection made to the proposal?

Diagramming
Carbon dioxide and methane(Greenhouse gases) --> Block heat==> Global Warming
To reduce Global Warming <---- Greenhouse gases to be reduced
Proposal : Methane via landfill --> Burned to generate power

Objection: Burning of methane ---> Increase in the CO2

What we want to most adequately counters the objection

Predicted Answer : It's okay to increase carbon dioxide at the cost of methane.. any choice fills such gap is our answer.

POE

(A) Every time a human being or other mammal exhales, there is some carbon dioxide released into the air. Irrelevant

(B) The conversion of methane to electricity would occur at a considerable distance from the landfills.So what, We are not filling the gap mentioned above.

(C) The methane that is used to generate electricity would generally be used as a substitute for a fuel that does not produce any greenhouse gases when burned. This will not weaken the objection, It actually strengthens it. Because if we are replacing some clean fuel with methane... this will increase carbon dioxide. Hence proposal is weakened

(D) Methane in the atmosphere is more effective in blocking the escape of heat from the Earth than is carbon dioxide. Hmm, It's inline with our prediction If methane is more effective in trapping the heat, Decrease in methane at the cost of CO2 will be a positive step. It will strengthen the proposal and weaken the objection.

(E) The amount of methane emitted from the landfills could be reduced if the materials whose decomposition produces methane were not discarded, but recycled.Irrelevant, We want a choice that deals with he mentioned proposal. We don't need any new proposal.

Pro-Tip: Always predict an answer or find gap before proceeding to the solutions. This will help you in eliminating the irrelevant and OFS choices easily in no time. You may need to take a pause and eliminate the left out choices in the final round(Ideally 2 - 3 will be left in case of 700+ questions).
Senior Manager
Joined: 23 Dec 2022
Posts: 312
Own Kudos [?]: 36 [0]
Given Kudos: 199
Re: Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escap [#permalink]
A) Every time a human being or other mammal exhales, there is some carbon dioxide released into the air.
This answer choice does not provide a direct counter to the objection, as it merely presents another source of carbon dioxide emissions. Therefore, it is not the most adequate counter to the objection.

B) The conversion of methane to electricity would occur at a considerable distance from the landfills.
This answer choice is not an adequate counter to the objection because it does not address the issue of carbon dioxide emissions resulting from the burning of methane.

C) The methane that is used to generate electricity would generally be used as a substitute for a fuel that does not produce any greenhouse gases when burned.
This answer choice provides a partial counter to the objection, as it suggests that burning methane for electricity would displace the use of other greenhouse-gas-emitting fuels. However, it does not directly address the concern about carbon dioxide emissions resulting from the burning of methane.

D) Methane in the atmosphere is more effective in blocking the escape of heat from the Earth than is carbon dioxide.
This answer choice provides a direct counter to the objection by suggesting that while burning methane would release carbon dioxide, it would still have a net positive effect on reducing greenhouse gas emissions because methane is more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. Therefore, this is the most adequate counter to the objection.

E) The amount of methane emitted from the landfills could be reduced if the materials whose decomposition produces methane were not discarded, but recycled.
This answer choice does not provide a direct counter to the objection, as it merely suggests a different solution to the problem of methane emissions from landfills. Therefore, it is not the most adequate counter to the objection.
Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 262
Own Kudos [?]: 167 [0]
Given Kudos: 2383
GMAT 1: 460 Q28 V26
GMAT 2: 550 Q39 V27
GMAT 3: 610 Q39 V35
GMAT 4: 650 Q42 V38
GMAT 5: 720 Q48 V41
Re: Proposal: Carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere block the escap [#permalink]

Evaluation of a Plan

Situation
The greenhouse gases methane and carbon dioxide trap heat in Earth's atmosphere and warm the planet. To reduce that global warming, emission of these gases needs to be reduced. For these reasons, someone has proposed that the methane emitted from landfills should be captured and burned to produce electricity. However, an objection to the proposal is that burning methane causes the release of carbon dioxide (another greenhouse gas) into the atmosphere.

Reasoning
What would be a logically effective response to counter the objection to the proposal? It is true that burning methane causes the release of carbon dioxide. However, if burning methane from landfills to generate electricity helps reduce net global warming, then the objection would not provide a good reason for rejecting the proposal. It turns out that, as a greenhouse gas, methane has a much more powerful impact on global warming than does carbon dioxide. This fact provides strong support for rejecting the objection to the proposal.

A
Clearly the effects referred to here are unavoidable in the lives of humans and other mammals on Earth. The emissions that must be curtailed to avoid global warming are those that are avoidable as a result of voluntary human activity.

B
This suggests that there could be costs in implementing the proposal, but the possibility of such costs does not, by itself, counter the proposal. Such costs could presumably be reduced by better siting of landfills and electricity-generation plants.

C
This information, if true, would not counter the objection and would provide some support for it. We would still need some reason to believe that allowing carbon dioxide emissions from burning methane would be better than continuing to release methane itself. In the absence of such a reason, we should expect no net greenhouse-gas-related benefit in substituting the landfill-emitted methane for a fuel that produces no greenhouse gases.

D
Correct. This information provides a strong rebuttal of the objection. Since methane has more powerful global-warming effects than does carbon dioxide, there is a net greenhouse-gas-reduction benefit in generating electricity by burning methane from landfills even though that burning itself emits the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide.

E
Undoubtedly it would be better to reduce the amount of methane that landfills will generate in the future. However, the possibility of doing so tells us nothing about whether the potential emission of carbon dioxide provides a reason not to burn the methane that is currently emitted from landfills.