Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 08:58 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 08:58
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3 
User avatar
huongguyen
User avatar
Joined: 23 May 2020
Last visit: 26 Nov 2022
Posts: 166
Own Kudos:
311
Given Kudos: 143
Concentration: Statistics, Finance
Schools: Foster '22 Marshall '25 Tepper '24
GPA: 3.41
WE:Advertising (Advertising and PR)
Schools: Foster '22 Marshall '25 Tepper '24
Posts: 166
Kudos: 311
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operator 16 Oct 2021, 07:01
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I have a question to understand the argument.
What does “reclamation cost” have to do with “reclamation technology”?
Is there any implied relationship between them?

"Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operators of surface mines to pay for the reclamation of mined-out land. Since then, reclamation technology has not improved. Yet, the average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine being reclaimed today is only four dollars per ton of coal that the mine produced, less than half what it cost to reclaim surface mines in the years immediately after the regulations took effect.

Thank you.
User avatar
avigutman
User avatar
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 1,293
Own Kudos:
1,930
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: NYU Stern (WA)
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,293
Kudos: 1,930
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operator 16 Oct 2021, 07:46
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
huongguyen
I have a question to understand the argument.
What does “reclamation cost” have to do with “reclamation technology”?
Is there any implied relationship between them?

"Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operators of surface mines to pay for the reclamation of mined-out land. Since then, reclamation technology has not improved. Yet, the average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine being reclaimed today is only four dollars per ton of coal that the mine produced, less than half what it cost to reclaim surface mines in the years immediately after the regulations took effect.

Thank you.
Show more

Yes, huongguyen, there's an implied relationship between them (that's the only way to explain the author's use of the word "yet").
Generally, when technology improves, one would expect the cost to go down. The author is effectively removing one potential explanation for why the costs dropped by more than 50% (it's not thanks to new tech, so there must be some other explanation).
User avatar
Maria240895chile
User avatar
Joined: 23 Apr 2021
Last visit: 07 Jun 2023
Posts: 115
Own Kudos:
59
Given Kudos: 115
Posts: 115
Kudos: 59
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operator 08 Feb 2023, 06:54
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The average reclamation cost = \([fraction]Q1*P1+Q2*P2*.....Qn*P3/Q1+Q2*...Qn/fraction]=4\) were P is reclamation cost for each quantity Q. In order to make that average smaller, either the numerator gets smaller or the denominator gets bigger. the case would be that quantities get smaller and so reclamation cost, making numerator smaller, that means that surface mining has diminished. The only alternative pointing to that is C

IMO C
User avatar
karannagpal
User avatar
Joined: 23 Dec 2021
Last visit: 11 Oct 2023
Posts: 2
Given Kudos: 8
Posts: 2
Kudos: 0
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operator 14 Feb 2023, 20:18
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi All,
mikemcgarry KarishmaB chetan2u AndrewN GMATNinja

Thanks all for your amazing responses. They have been super helpful. But I still cannot resist asking a couple of trivial questions.

How does Option C explain less than halving of reclamation costs, we don't know if not digging up mountain areas reduced the cost by 10 cents, 2 cents, 10 dollars or 30 dollars.

Secondly how does per ton cost of coal link with land reclamation cost? Is there a possibility that by digging up additional coal, the overall cost remained the same, but cost per ton declined?

Thanks
Karan Nagpal
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,994
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,994
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operator 15 Feb 2023, 00:39
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
karannagpal
Hi All,
mikemcgarry KarishmaB chetan2u AndrewN GMATNinja

Thanks all for your amazing responses. They have been super helpful. But I still cannot resist asking a couple of trivial questions.

How does Option C explain less than halving of reclamation costs, we don't know if not digging up mountain areas reduced the cost by 10 cents, 2 cents, 10 dollars or 30 dollars.

Secondly how does per ton cost of coal link with land reclamation cost? Is there a possibility that by digging up additional coal, the overall cost remained the same, but cost per ton declined?

Thanks
Karan Nagpal
Show more

Note the question stem:
Which of the following, if true, most helps to account for the drop in reclamation costs described?

"most helps to account"
The question doesn't say "completely accounts for the drop...".
We don't know how much it accounts but we do understand that it does help in accounting for the drop in reclamation costs.

Also, the reclamation cost of a piece of land depends on the topography of the land. Reclaiming a mine at sea level might be much easier than reclaiming one in mountains.
But how do we measure whether it was worth it to mine the coal, spoil the land and then reclaim it? We do it in economic terms. Perhaps that is why we find the average reclamation cost in terms of dollars/ton of coal mined.

Reclamation cost per ton = Total reclamation cost of the mine/Total tons of coal produced.

How could this value go from an average of say $10/ton of coal 20 years ago to $4/ton of coal now?

It could have happened in 2 ways - Either average reclamation cost of a mine has gone down or the amount of coal extracted has increased a lot i.e. either the numerator has become smaller or the denominator has become greater.

Often, a process becomes cheaper when the technology advances. But we are given that there was no improvement in tech. Then average reclamation cost could have gone down because areas of tricky topography (and hence high reclamation cost) are not being mined i.e. the numerator has reduced.

Hence option (C) explains why the average reclamation cost/ton has gone down.
User avatar
karannagpal
User avatar
Joined: 23 Dec 2021
Last visit: 11 Oct 2023
Posts: 2
Given Kudos: 8
Posts: 2
Kudos: 0
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operator 15 Feb 2023, 08:39
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thanks KarishmaB. I guess Had Option E talked about increased absolute volumes of coal mining from surface mines instead of percentage increase, it could have been a contender itself. Is that right?
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,994
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,994
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operator 17 Feb 2023, 01:42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
karannagpal
Thanks KarishmaB. I guess Had Option E talked about increased absolute volumes of coal mining from surface mines instead of percentage increase, it could have been a contender itself. Is that right?
Show more


I think the question required a complete post of its own.
Check it out here: https://anaprep.com/critical-reasoning- ... -question/

and the answer to your question is 'Yes'!
User avatar
Raman109
User avatar
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Last visit: 28 Jul 2025
Posts: 805
Own Kudos:
170
Given Kudos: 33
Posts: 805
Kudos: 170
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operator 03 Nov 2023, 17:46
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Understanding the argument is essential, especially for non-native speakers if you don't know what reclamation means. I wish GMAT would have given a brief as it normally gives to level set. I know, as a native speaker, this is easy but too much to assume for someone who has a bit of a tight hand on vocabulary. Think of Maxwell's equation ∇ · E = ρ / ε₀, which may be a cakewalk for a physicist but not for some of us here. But yes, if someone defines each term, it can be more accessible. Anyway, there can be some instances in CR or RC for non-native speakers, but try to see the bigger picture - it'll help, just in case GMAT drops the ball. Moreover, reclamation refers to restoring or rehabilitating land that has been mined.

Now, let's look at the argument.
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operators of surface mines to pay for the reclamation of mined-out land. Ok, they had to pay for the expenses incurred to reclaim the land.
Since then, reclamation technology has not improved. What does it mean? It means the expense is similar. So if it was expensive, then it must be expensive now. Right? Yes.
Yet, the average reclamation cost for a surface coal mine being reclaimed today is only four dollars per ton of coal that the mine produced, less than half what it cost to reclaim surface mines in the years immediately after the regulations took effect. - That is the paradox. Based on the earlier information, the expense may be similar; it says that the reclamation cost per ton has been reduced by more than half. How? Let's see.

Suppose there are two mines, M1 and M2.
Twenty years ago -
Reclamation cost of M1 - $600
Reclamation cost for M2 - $400

Coal from M1 - 50 tons
Coal from M2 - 50 tons

Average reclamation cost = $1000/100 = $10

Now
Reclamation cost of M1 - $600
Reclamation cost for M2 - $400

Coal from M1 - 0 tons
Coal from M2 - 100 tons

Average reclamation cost = $400/100 = $4

So how is the average reduced? We stopped or reduced mining the areas that were expensive to reclaim and mine the cheaper ones.

Option Elimination -

A. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, coal mines in Balzania continued to be less expensive to operate than coal mines in almost any other country. - Does this matter? No. Out of scope.

B. In the twenty years since the regulations took effect, the use of coal as a fuel has declined from the level it was at in the previous twenty years. - worsens the paradox unless we stop mining the areas that were expensive to reclaim (and this option doesn't say that we stopped mining the expensive ones). If, say, the coal mined now is 50 tons. Keeping all parameters same (our expense for M1 and M2 still stays the same. Why? Did the passage say that the technology hasn't changed? Yes. If the Tech has not changed, the costs remain the same), the Average reclamation cost = 1000/50 = $20 per ton. So it should have increased and not decreased. Opposite of what we are looking for.

C. Mine operators have generally ceased surface mining in the mountainous areas of Balzania because reclamation costs per ton of coal produced are particularly high for mines in such areas. - ok. Aligned with what we discussed. Don't mine the areas that carry high reclamation costs.

D. Even after Balzania began requiring surface mine operators to pay reclamation costs, surface mines continued to produce coal at a lower total cost than underground mines. - The paradox we are trying to solve here is that the cost should have increased or stayed the same as the technology has not changed, but in reality, the cost reduces more than half. As per this option, if they continued to mine, then the cost should have increased. Right? But that worsens the paradox as they have to pay reclamation costs for surface mines per the passage. We don't know anything from the passage about the underground mines.

E. As compared to twenty years ago, a greater percentage of the coal mined in Balzania today comes from surface mines. - Again, this should worsen the pardon. Opposite of what we are looking for.
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,830
Own Kudos:
986
Posts: 18,830
Kudos: 986
Twenty years ago, Balzania put in place regulations requiring operator 13 Nov 2024, 04:21
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
   1   2   3 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
189 posts