|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
11 May 2020, 00:34
Kudos
Bookmarks
Most
strengthen: Runoff from roads is often absorbed by farmland. Most
weaken: Sand is much less effective than salt at making roads safe to drive in winter conditions.
strengthen: Runoff from roads is often absorbed by farmland. Most
weaken: Sand is much less effective than salt at making roads safe to drive in winter conditions.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
65%
(hard)
Question Stats:
67% (02:19) correct
33%
(02:35)
wrong
based on 1807
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Researcher: Soils are adversely affected by road salts used to melt ice and snow, particularly along roadsides and salt storage areas. Soil samples were collected from highway medians and in salt storage yards. These samples showed chloride levels 11–160 times the level sufficient to inhibit bacteria growth in soil. The samples also had sodium levels 15–200 times the level sufficient to inhibit bacterial growth in soil. Inhibited bacterial growth in soil greatly inhibits plant growth in that soil.
An agriculture official would like to use the researcher’s results to support the argument that sand, rather than road salts, should be used as a winter road treatment, thereby eliminating the need for salt yards.
Select the additional information that, if true, would most strengthen the official’s case and select the additional information that, if true, would most weaken the official’s case. Make only two selections, one in each column.
An agriculture official would like to use the researcher’s results to support the argument that sand, rather than road salts, should be used as a winter road treatment, thereby eliminating the need for salt yards.
Select the additional information that, if true, would most strengthen the official’s case and select the additional information that, if true, would most weaken the official’s case. Make only two selections, one in each column.
|
Most strengthen |
Most weaken |
Statements |
| A high number of road accidents are attributable to untreated roads in winter. | ||
| The cost of removing salts from soil in abandoned salt yards is high. | ||
| High chloride concentrations in drinking water supplies have a negative impact on health. | ||
| Sand is much less effective than salt at making roads safe to drive in winter conditions. | ||
| Runoff from roads is often absorbed by farmland. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Most
strengthen: Runoff from roads is often absorbed by farmland. Most
weaken: Sand is much less effective than salt at making roads safe to drive in winter conditions.
strengthen: Runoff from roads is often absorbed by farmland. Most
weaken: Sand is much less effective than salt at making roads safe to drive in winter conditions.
Using official mocks already?
Add GMAT Club Tests for harder practice, analytics, and explanations without overlapping Official Guide or official mock questions.
Try it now →
bM22
Retired Moderator
Joined: 05 May 2016
Last visit: 17 Jul 2025
Posts: 519
Given Kudos: 1,316
Location: India
Schools: IIM (A) IIM (A) IIM-A '24 (A) ISB '24 (A)
Products:
11 May 2020, 01:29
Kudos
Bookmarks
1. A high number of road accidents are attributable to untreated roads in winter.
Neither of Both - since it neither weakens the use of sand as a winter road treatment nor strengthens the same.
So irrelevant for us.
2.The cost of removing salts from soil in abandoned salt yards is high.
Neither of Both - since it does help in strengthening the claim that use of salt for road treatment need to be replaced, but not specifically strength/weaken the claim by the official regarding the use of sand. So irrelevant for us.
3. High chloride concentrations in drinking water supplies have a negative impact on health.
Neither of Both - since it doesn't help in weakening/strengthening the claim, that the use of sand could either cause this effect, or prevent it.
4. Sand is much less effective than salt at making roads safe to drive in winter conditions.
Weakens - Now, this statement says that sand is less effective than salt, directly undermining the claim of the official, implying that sand cannot be a suitable replacement of salt, thus weakening the statement.
5. Runoff from roads is often absorbed by farmland.
Strengthens - This statement strengthens the claim of the official, since if sand is used, it would absorb any amount of water that is a runoff from road, as no salt means sufficient amount of bacteria, which in turn implies, plants, which is turn implies any runoff from roads will be absorbed.
So 4th one weakens the claim, and the 5th one strengthens it.
Neither of Both - since it neither weakens the use of sand as a winter road treatment nor strengthens the same.
So irrelevant for us.
2.The cost of removing salts from soil in abandoned salt yards is high.
Neither of Both - since it does help in strengthening the claim that use of salt for road treatment need to be replaced, but not specifically strength/weaken the claim by the official regarding the use of sand. So irrelevant for us.
3. High chloride concentrations in drinking water supplies have a negative impact on health.
Neither of Both - since it doesn't help in weakening/strengthening the claim, that the use of sand could either cause this effect, or prevent it.
4. Sand is much less effective than salt at making roads safe to drive in winter conditions.
Weakens - Now, this statement says that sand is less effective than salt, directly undermining the claim of the official, implying that sand cannot be a suitable replacement of salt, thus weakening the statement.
5. Runoff from roads is often absorbed by farmland.
Strengthens - This statement strengthens the claim of the official, since if sand is used, it would absorb any amount of water that is a runoff from road, as no salt means sufficient amount of bacteria, which in turn implies, plants, which is turn implies any runoff from roads will be absorbed.
So 4th one weakens the claim, and the 5th one strengthens it.
07 Apr 2021, 03:37
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Explanation
There is insufficient information to link drinking water to the agriculture official’s argument, therefore the third option is eliminated.
While the high cost of removing salts from soil in abandoned salt yards could strengthen the official’s case, additional information would need to be presented. For instance, if additional salt yards had been proposed, then switching to sand as a road treatment method could prevent further environmental damage. In the absence of such additional information, the high cost of removing salts from soil in abandoned salt yards does not, in itself, strengthen the official’s case significantly.
The statement that most strengthens the official’s case is that runoff from roads is often absorbed by farmland. Unlike the statement about salt yards, this indicates that maintaining the use of salt as a road treatment presents an immediate consequence for food production—a consequence the agriculture official wants to avoid.
The correct answer is Runoff from roads is often absorbed by farmland.
The high number of road accidents attributable to untreated roads in winter could weaken the case if the official had proposed not treating the roads at all, but as the agriculture official offered sand as an alternative, this option does not affect the official’s proposal. If true, the statement comparing the effectiveness of sand as a road treatment to the effectiveness of salt provides an argument against the use of sand that the official’s argument does not address.
The correct answer is Sand is much less effective than salt at making roads safe to drive in winter conditions.
There is insufficient information to link drinking water to the agriculture official’s argument, therefore the third option is eliminated.
While the high cost of removing salts from soil in abandoned salt yards could strengthen the official’s case, additional information would need to be presented. For instance, if additional salt yards had been proposed, then switching to sand as a road treatment method could prevent further environmental damage. In the absence of such additional information, the high cost of removing salts from soil in abandoned salt yards does not, in itself, strengthen the official’s case significantly.
The statement that most strengthens the official’s case is that runoff from roads is often absorbed by farmland. Unlike the statement about salt yards, this indicates that maintaining the use of salt as a road treatment presents an immediate consequence for food production—a consequence the agriculture official wants to avoid.
The correct answer is Runoff from roads is often absorbed by farmland.
The high number of road accidents attributable to untreated roads in winter could weaken the case if the official had proposed not treating the roads at all, but as the agriculture official offered sand as an alternative, this option does not affect the official’s proposal. If true, the statement comparing the effectiveness of sand as a road treatment to the effectiveness of salt provides an argument against the use of sand that the official’s argument does not address.
The correct answer is Sand is much less effective than salt at making roads safe to drive in winter conditions.
