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

It is currently 22 Oct 2018, 01:01

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

The petrochemical industry claims that chemical waste dumps pose no th

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

Hide Tags

SVP
SVP
User avatar
V
Status: Preparing GMAT
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 1738
Location: Pakistan
GPA: 3.39
Premium Member CAT Tests
The petrochemical industry claims that chemical waste dumps pose no th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Mar 2017, 11:58
1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  5% (low)

Question Stats:

89% (01:34) correct 11% (02:10) wrong based on 174 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Source: Nova GMAT

The petrochemical industry claims that chemical waste dumps pose no threat to people living near them. If this is true, then why do they locate the plants in sparsely populated regions. By not locating the chemical dumps in densely populated areas the petrochemical industry tacitly admits that these chemicals are potentially dangerous to the people living nearby.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the author's argument?

(A) Funding through the environmental Super Fund to clean up poorly run waste dumps is reserved for rural areas only.
(B) Until chemical dumps are proven 100% safe, it would be imprudent to locate them were they could potentially do the most harm.
(C) Locating the dumps in sparsely populated areas is less expensive and involves less government red tape.
(D) The potential for chemicals to leach into the water table has in the past been underestimated.
(E) People in cities are more likely to sue the industry if their health is harmed by the dumps.

_________________

Official PS Practice Questions
Press +1 Kudos if this post is helpful

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 14 Oct 2017
Posts: 7
CAT Tests
Re: The petrochemical industry claims that chemical waste dumps pose no th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Feb 2018, 09:39
Please explain, why is Option E not a correct answer.
Senior PS Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 26 Feb 2016
Posts: 3191
Location: India
GPA: 3.12
Premium Member CAT Tests
The petrochemical industry claims that chemical waste dumps pose no th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Feb 2018, 10:53
SajjadAhmad wrote:
Source: Nova GMAT

The petrochemical industry claims that chemical waste dumps pose no threat to people living near them. If this is true, then why do they locate the plants in sparsely populated regions. By not locating the chemical dumps in densely populated areas the petrochemical industry tacitly admits that these chemicals are potentially dangerous to the people living nearby.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the author's argument?

(A) Funding through the environmental Super Fund to clean up poorly run waste dumps is reserved for rural areas only.
(B) Until chemical dumps are proven 100% safe, it would be imprudent to locate them were they could potentially do the most harm.
(C) Locating the dumps in sparsely populated areas is less expensive and involves less government red tape.
(D) The potential for chemicals to leach into the water table has in the past been underestimated.
(E) People in cities are more likely to sue the industry if their health is harmed by the dumps.


mahapatro

This argument talks about the chemical waste dumps being located at sparsely populated regions.
It also talks about the petrochemical industry which by not placing the dumps at densely populated
regions tacitly imply that the dumps might be dangerous to people.

We have been asked to weaken this argument. Option E does not in anyway impact the conclusion
by proving that the dumps are not dangerous. However, Option C gives us an alternate reason
why the dumps are located in sparsely populated areas.

Hope this helps you!
_________________

You've got what it takes, but it will take everything you've got

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 31 May 2017
Posts: 322
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: The petrochemical industry claims that chemical waste dumps pose no th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Feb 2018, 20:04
The question uses the following line "By not locating the chemical dumps in densely populated areas" as the main evidence for its claim. To weaken this , we need to find alternate reason to explain why chemical waste are dumped in sparsely populated areas.

(A) Funding through the environmental Super Fund to clean up poorly run waste dumps is reserved for rural areas only - Out of scope
(B) Until chemical dumps are proven 100% safe, it would be imprudent to locate them were they could potentially do the most harm -This might look right but does not give concrete information that weakens the question.
(C) Locating the dumps in sparsely populated areas is less expensive and involves less government red tape. - Correct
(D) The potential for chemicals to leach into the water table has in the past been underestimated. - Out of scope
(E) People in cities are more likely to sue the industry if their health is harmed by the dumps - Out of scope

Ans: C
_________________

Please give kudos if it helps

Resources
Ultimate GMAT Quantitative Megathread | ALL YOU NEED FOR QUANT ! ! ! | SC Blogs by Magoosh | How to improve your verbal score | Things i wish i could've done earlier | Ultimate Q51 Guide

Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 23 Sep 2016
Posts: 220
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: The petrochemical industry claims that chemical waste dumps pose no th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Feb 2018, 01:11
SajjadAhmad wrote:
Source: Nova GMAT

The petrochemical industry claims that chemical waste dumps pose no threat to people living near them. If this is true, then why do they locate the plants in sparsely populated regions. By not locating the chemical dumps in densely populated areas the petrochemical industry tacitly admits that these chemicals are potentially dangerous to the people living nearby.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the author's argument?

(A) Funding through the environmental Super Fund to clean up poorly run waste dumps is reserved for rural areas only.
(B) Until chemical dumps are proven 100% safe, it would be imprudent to locate them were they could potentially do the most harm.
(C) Locating the dumps in sparsely populated areas is less expensive and involves less government red tape.
(D) The potential for chemicals to leach into the water table has in the past been underestimated.
(E) People in cities are more likely to sue the industry if their health is harmed by the dumps.

IMO C
A out of scope
B DOESN'T tell about rural and urban
C correct.
D nothing about water eliminated.
E strengthing

if you like my explanation please provide me KUDOS
VP
VP
User avatar
V
Status: It's near - I can see.
Joined: 13 Apr 2013
Posts: 1266
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, Operations
GMAT 1: 480 Q38 V22
GPA: 3.01
WE: Engineering (Consulting)
Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: The petrochemical industry claims that chemical waste dumps pose no th  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Mar 2018, 18:50
SajjadAhmad wrote:
Source: Nova GMAT

The petrochemical industry claims that chemical waste dumps pose no threat to people living near them. If this is true, then why do they locate the plants in sparsely populated regions. By not locating the chemical dumps in densely populated areas the petrochemical industry tacitly admits that these chemicals are potentially dangerous to the people living nearby.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the author's argument?

(A) Funding through the environmental Super Fund to clean up poorly run waste dumps is reserved for rural areas only.
(B) Until chemical dumps are proven 100% safe, it would be imprudent to locate them were they could potentially do the most harm.
(C) Locating the dumps in sparsely populated areas is less expensive and involves less government red tape.
(D) The potential for chemicals to leach into the water table has in the past been underestimated.
(E) People in cities are more likely to sue the industry if their health is harmed by the dumps.


(A) Funding through the environmental Super Fund to clean up poorly run waste dumps is reserved for rural areas only.

(B) Until chemical dumps are proven 100% safe, it would be imprudent to locate them were they could potentially do the most harm.

(C) Locating the dumps in sparsely populated areas is less expensive and involves less government red tape. Provides alternate reason

(D) The potential for chemicals to leach into the water table has in the past been underestimated.

(E) People in cities are more likely to sue the industry if their health is harmed by the dumps.

Clear cut (C)
_________________

"Do not watch clock; Do what it does. KEEP GOING."

GMAT Club Bot
Re: The petrochemical industry claims that chemical waste dumps pose no th &nbs [#permalink] 24 Mar 2018, 18:50
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The petrochemical industry claims that chemical waste dumps pose no th

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


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| 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®.