The residents of the city of Tibica are supplied water by two local

Question

The residents of the city of Tibica are supplied water by two local corporations: TMC (Tibica Municipal Corporation) and TWMC (TibicaWater Management Corporation). Under pressure from the government, TMC recently increased its supply of water to the city. Even though TWMC maintained its supply level, the residents complained that their overall supply of water has reduced. Therefore, it seems likely that

Which of the following statements best completes the above passage

A. In the recent past, the number of regions where the demand for water has increased has been greater than the number of regions where the demand for water has decreased.

B. In some areas of Tibica, the amount of water lost during distribution as a proportion of the amount of water supplied has increased

C. The complaints made by the residents of Tibica against the corporations that supply water are always driven more by perception than by ground realities.

D. TMWC, which used to supply water uniformly across the city, has rearranged its distribution such that TMWC’s water supply in an area is proportional only to the demand in that area

E. Even though TMC increased its supply of water to the city, it didn’t ensure that the supply was proportional to the demand.

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects: 
 
   Data Sufficiency Butler 
   Problem Solving Butler  
   Sentence Correction Butler  
   Reading Comprehension Butler  
   Integrated Reasoning Butler

mysterymanrog · Answer

A) There is no information in the stem about changes in demand, therefore this is not a suitable conclusion to the passage.

B) Tricky but correct. In one area, TMC increased its supply of water, per government request, and despite the other company not decreasing it's supply, the overall supply decreased. This means that the area must have had more water supply and, since the overall water supply decreased, lost more water. So the ratio (water lost)/(water supplied) most likely increased.

C) There is no way to conclude this based off the passage.

D) There is no information given on how TMWC schedules its water in the stem.

E)There is no way to conclude this given the information in the stem.

marcominini · Answer

Two corporations are supplying water:
TMC increases its supply
TMWC keeps usual supply level

However, residents complain to receive less water —> the most logical explanation is that water is lost during distribution.
Option B is the one that best complete the passage.

Posted from my mobile device

bestreturn · Answer

I doubt B.

If water is lost as proportion to water supplied increase, there may still be enough supply that doesn't cause complaints
eg. Supply 100 but lost 10% so become 90, but if supply is 150 but lost increase to 20%, supply becomes 120 so there are still more than before.

Markhu106 · Answer

A. Talks about demand changes across regions, not supply.
Does not explain how total supply decreased.

B. "In some areas...the amount of water lost during distribution...has increased."
This directly explains the paradox: Even if water input increased or stayed the same, effective water reaching residents could be lower because more is being lost in distribution leaks.
This provides a mechanism by which residents receive less, matching the complaint.

C. Says complaints are perception-based.
This weakens the conclusion rather than completes it—the passage concludes something likely happened, not that the residents are mistaken.

D. TWMC changed its distribution to match demand.
But TWMC maintained supply level overall, and redistributing it doesn’t logically cause total water received citywide to decrease. It may cause some areas to get less, but the passage says residents (collectively) reported overall decrease, not localized shortages.

E. TMC didn’t supply proportional to demand.
Lack of proportionality doesn't reduce total volume. Even if misallocated, city-wide supply wouldn't be reduced.
Doesn’t explain overall reduction in perceived supply.

Correct Answer: B

Pratyaksh1907 · Answer

I don't understand how B is answer and not E. B is only about some areas which can be anything but all. E is about the whole supply itself right?

GMATQuizMaster · Answer

Hi Pratyaksh,

It seems there’s a slight misunderstanding of the situation described in the passage (I’ve broken it down below- let me know if I’m missing how you’re reading it).

As per the passage: 
 The city’s water supply comes from only  two sources : TMC and TWMC.

Understand the baseline  
Earlier, let’s assume:
 
 TMC supplied  50 units  
 TWMC supplied  60 units   
So, total water supplied =  110 units 
 Ideally, residents should have received  110 units  of water.
  
After TMC increases supply  
Now suppose:
 
 TMC increases its supply to  70 units  
 TWMC maintains its supply at  60 units   
Total water supplied =  130 units 
 So, all else equal, residents should have received  more  water than before.

What actually happens  
However, residents report that the water they receive has  decreased  (say, to  100 units ).
So the question becomes:
 Why did the water received by residents fall even though total supply increased?

Why  Choice B  works
Choice B says that  water loss during distribution increased .
For example:
 
 Earlier, if  10%  of water was lost, residents received
 90% of 110 =  99 units  
 Now, if  30%  of water is lost, residents receive
 70% of 130 =  91 units   
So even though  total supply increased ,  effective water reaching residents decreased .
 This directly explains the observed outcome, which is why  B is correct .

Why  Choice E  does  not  work
Choice E says that the increased supply is  still insufficient to meet total demand  (say demand is 150 units).
That may be true- but it  does not explain the drop  in water received.
 
 Residents were already not meeting full demand earlier. 
 After the increase, even if demand is unmet, residents should still receive  more  not less.  
So Choice E only conveys that the increase was not enough to fulfill the demand. It does not explain why the residents received reduced water supply even though total supply went up.

Hope that resolves your doubt!

Pratyaksh1907 · Answer

Absolutely right!
I missed the point that E is not explaining the drop in the water supply even after the increase.
I rejected B on the basis of wrong assumption. I assumed that due to already existing loopholes, if the supply increases, then the wastage will also increase.
My understanding,   = 1:10(before) = 2:20(now)
But what B was telling is that,   = 1:10(before), 3:20(now).
Thanks a lot for clearing my doubt.

GMATQuizMaster · Answer

Glad to know it was helpful

It is important to understand where and why you faltered and make sure you do not repeat the same mistake in other questions. Good luck!

The residents of the city of Tibica are supplied water by two local

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

The residents of the city of Tibica are supplied water by two local

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards