It is currently 18 Nov 2017, 07:15

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

RAGCT Day 1: From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for

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

Hide Tags

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 09 Sep 2012
Posts: 1

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Re: RAGCT Day 1: From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Oct 2014, 08:09
Dude its B from my side...lets wait for OA

Posted from my mobile device

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 03 Feb 2013
Posts: 941

Kudos [?]: 1075 [0], given: 548

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V44
GPA: 3.88
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Reviews Badge
Re: RAGCT Day 1: From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Oct 2014, 08:12
yogesh0723 wrote:
Dude its B from my side...lets wait for OA

Posted from my mobile device


OA is already posted and it is C)
_________________

Thanks,
Kinjal
My Debrief : http://gmatclub.com/forum/hardwork-never-gets-unrewarded-for-ever-189267.html#p1449379
My Application Experience : http://gmatclub.com/forum/hardwork-never-gets-unrewarded-for-ever-189267-40.html#p1516961
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/kinjal-das/

Please click on Kudos, if you think the post is helpful

Kudos [?]: 1075 [0], given: 548

MBA Blogger
User avatar
B
Joined: 19 Apr 2014
Posts: 103

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 59

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Schools: NTU '19
WE: Analyst (Computer Software)
Re: RAGCT Day 1: From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Nov 2014, 08:33
Why A is wrong? The stem is talking about the decrease in weight percentage. If plastic bottles have less weight, then the overall weight % would be decreased automatically!! Someone please explain.
_________________

KUDOS please!! If it helped. :)
Warm Regards.
Visit My Blog

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 59

Retired Moderator
avatar
B
Joined: 17 Sep 2013
Posts: 387

Kudos [?]: 348 [0], given: 139

Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 730 Q51 V38
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: RAGCT Day 1: From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Nov 2014, 21:51
scofield1521 wrote:
Why A is wrong? The stem is talking about the decrease in weight percentage. If plastic bottles have less weight, then the overall weight % would be decreased automatically!! Someone please explain.


Hope this Helps

100 companies use 100 cans of Al
Garbage- 100 cans if not recycled
Now people start recycling-
Garbage- 20 cans..rest recycled....Reduction- 80%

100 companies use 100 plastics bottles as containers
Garbage- 100 cans if not recycled
Now people start recycling
Garbage- 50 cans..rest recycled....Reduction- 50% (Less than Al cans)
But Manufacturers replace the original plastic containers with polymer containers
now the 100 companies use 20 plastics bottles as containers rest polymer
Recycled- 10 container (Assuming 50% recycling as above)
So Now,the usage is even lower, & hence lower turnout of such bottles in garbage-10 cans ...Reduction- 90%
_________________

Appreciate the efforts...KUDOS for all
Don't let an extra chromosome get you down..:P

Kudos [?]: 348 [0], given: 139

MBA Blogger
User avatar
B
Joined: 19 Apr 2014
Posts: 103

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 59

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Schools: NTU '19
WE: Analyst (Computer Software)
Re: RAGCT Day 1: From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Nov 2014, 22:11
JusTLucK04 wrote:
scofield1521 wrote:
Why A is wrong? The stem is talking about the decrease in weight percentage. If plastic bottles have less weight, then the overall weight % would be decreased automatically!! Someone please explain.


Hope this Helps

100 companies use 100 cans of Al
Garbage- 100 cans if not recycled
Now people start recycling-
Garbage- 20 cans..rest recycled....Reduction- 80%

100 companies use 100 plastics bottles as containers
Garbage- 100 cans if not recycled
Now people start recycling
Garbage- 50 cans..rest recycled....Reduction- 50% (Less than Al cans)
But Manufacturers replace the original plastic containers with polymer containers
now the 100 companies use 20 plastics bottles as containers rest polymer
Recycled- 10 container (Assuming 50% recycling as above)
So Now,the usage is even lower, & hence lower turnout of such bottles in garbage-10 cans ...Reduction- 90%


So this says, it doesn't matter if plastic bottles are heavier or lighter!! :!:
If plastic bottles are replaced with some other material, then the recycle % is reduced as # of bottles are reduced.
I don't know how but I still believe A is the right answer because para is talking about weight, and option C is introducing a 3rd element which was not talked about anywhere.
_________________

KUDOS please!! If it helped. :)
Warm Regards.
Visit My Blog

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 59

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 21

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 2

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
Schools: Booth PT '18 (S)
Re: RAGCT Day 1: From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Jan 2015, 07:59
C

A vs C....close contenders....

A may or may not help.....C definitely does

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 2

Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10145

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Premium Member
Re: RAGCT Day 1: From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Mar 2016, 20:30
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 103

Kudos [?]: 72 [0], given: 41

Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V35
GPA: 3.7
Re: RAGCT Day 1: From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 May 2016, 12:14
Can somebody please tell why is option A incorrect? I can't see any useful explanation to this brilliant question.

Kudos [?]: 72 [0], given: 41

VP
VP
avatar
S
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1071

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 1024

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: RAGCT Day 1: From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Nov 2017, 22:11
boiled down to C and E.
E cannot be the right answer b/c E needs an assumption that connects the color marking and the garbage recycling, or reduction.

There is a similar question, but the right answer uses the same pattern.

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 1024

Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 93

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 43

Re: RAGCT Day 1: From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Nov 2017, 09:04
From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for a steadily decreasing percentage of the total weight of domestic garbage in the Brazil. The increasingly widespread practice of recycling aluminum and plastic was responsible for most of this decline. However, although aluminum recycling was more widely practiced in this period than plastic recycling, it was found that the weight of plastic bottles in domestic garbage declined by a greater percentage than the weight of aluminum cans.

Which of the following, if true of the Brazil in the period 2000 to 2010, most helps to account for the finding?

A. Plastic bottles are significantly heavier than aluminum cans of comparable size.

B. Recycled aluminum cans were almost all beverage containers, but a significant fraction of the recycled plastic bottles had contained products other than beverages.

C. Manufacturers replaced many plastic bottles, but few aluminum cans, with polymer containers.

D. The total weight of plastic bottles purchased by domestics increased at a slightly faster rate than the total weight of aluminum cans.

E. In many areas, plastic bottles had to be sorted by color of the plastic before being recycled, whereas aluminum cans required no sorting.

This is actually a resolve the paradox question: there was more aluminum recycling than plastics recycling, yet the weight of plastic decreased proportionately more than aluminum weight. C explains how that could happen.

Kudos if you like the answer :-)
_________________

Give me kudos and see what happens to your GMAT score :-)

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 43

Re: RAGCT Day 1: From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for   [#permalink] 10 Nov 2017, 09:04

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 50 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

RAGCT Day 1: From 2000 to 2010, beverage containers accounted for

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


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.