Events & Promotions
|
|
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.
May 0510:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
GMAT Inequalities is a high-frequency topic in GMAT Quant, but many students struggle because the concepts behave differently from standard algebra. Understanding the right rules, patterns, and edge cases can significantly improve both speed and accuracy.- May 06
08:30 AM PDT
-09:30 AM PDT
In Episode 3 of our GMAT Ninja Critical Reasoning series, we tackle Discrepancy, Paradox, and Explain an Oddity questions. You know the feeling: the passage gives you two facts that seem completely contradictory.... - May 08
08:00 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Join the special YouTube live-stream for selecting the winners of GMAT Club MBA Scholarships sponsored by Juno live. Watch who gets these coveted MBA scholarships offered by GMAT Club and Juno.
12 Aug 2024, 09:20
Kudos
Bookmarks
Recent studies show that despite global efforts to reduce plastic waste by banning single-use plastics, the amount of plastic debris washing up on beaches has not decreased. Evidence of this is the consistent volume of plastic waste found during beach cleanups over the past year compared to the previous year. Nevertheless, environmental scientists have not concluded that these bans are ineffective.
Which of the following would, if true, provide the strongest reason for the scientists' reaction to the findings?
A. The production of single-use plastics has been significantly reduced in most countries over the past decade.
B. The amount of plastic waste produced annually varies significantly from year to year.
C. Many countries have implemented strict regulations against the use of single-use plastics in the past few years.
D. Strong ocean currents in the past twelve months have carried more debris to coastal areas than usual.
E. Plastic waste can persist in the ocean environment for hundreds of years before decomposing.
Which of the following would, if true, provide the strongest reason for the scientists' reaction to the findings?
A. The production of single-use plastics has been significantly reduced in most countries over the past decade.
B. The amount of plastic waste produced annually varies significantly from year to year.
C. Many countries have implemented strict regulations against the use of single-use plastics in the past few years.
D. Strong ocean currents in the past twelve months have carried more debris to coastal areas than usual.
E. Plastic waste can persist in the ocean environment for hundreds of years before decomposing.
12 Aug 2024, 09:20
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
Recent studies show that despite global efforts to reduce plastic waste by banning single-use plastics, the amount of plastic debris washing up on beaches has not decreased. Evidence of this is the consistent volume of plastic waste found during beach cleanups over the past year compared to the previous year. Nevertheless, environmental scientists have not concluded that these bans are ineffective.
Which of the following would, if true, provide the strongest reason for the scientists' reaction to the findings?
A. The production of single-use plastics has been significantly reduced in most countries over the past decade.
B. The amount of plastic waste produced annually varies significantly from year to year.
C. Many countries have implemented strict regulations against the use of single-use plastics in the past few years.
D. Strong ocean currents in the past twelve months have carried more debris to coastal areas than usual.
E. Plastic waste can persist in the ocean environment for hundreds of years before decomposing.
Correct Answer: D. Strong ocean currents in the past twelve months have carried more debris to coastal areas than usual.
Option D provides the reason for why environmental scientists might hesitate to declare the bans on single-use plastics ineffective. If unusual ocean currents have affected the distribution of plastic debris, this would explain why there hasn’t been a noticeable decrease in waste on beaches year over year and thus why the scientist felt the ban was not ineffective.
A. The production of single-use plastics has been significantly reduced in most countries over the past decade.
This is the opposite answer choice from what we are looking for. This would make the paradox worse. Lots of plastics production has been reduced and yet we are seeing no results year over year. Bans are clearly not working unless there is an explanation but this choice does not explain why the same amount of plastics is washing up. Eliminate it.
B. The amount of plastic waste produced annually varies significantly from year to year.
If the amount of plastic waste produced annual varies, why has the same amount washing out on the beaches? Also, why would the scientist feel that the bans were not ineffective if the results were inconclusive? What would be the basis of their judgement? This answer choice is a contender but it is incomplete and we should try to find a better one as this one leaves too many gaps.
C. Many countries have implemented strict regulations against the use of single-use plastics in the past few years.
This answer choice similar to A does not address why the same amount of plastics is washing up on the beaches, and why despite the same amount washing up, scientists felt their ban was effective.
E. Plastic waste can persist in the ocean environment for hundreds of years before decomposing.
As is, E) does not explain the paradox: 1) constant levels of waste washing up year over year and 2) why the scientists felt the ban was not ineffective.
In the passage, scientists are measuring the ban effectiveness with the plastic debris washing up, and they are not seeing any difference year over year. E) does not explain why the amount of plastic washing up is constant despite the ban (source) which should have reduced the input. Plastic clearly did not decompose (duh) but the amount of plastics should have reduced year over year if the bans were working (it is implied in the question that a reduction was expected).
Note that E) does not mean that plastics take hundreds of years to wash ashore or that there is a delay in banning and seeing results for hundreds of years. Decomposing was never a solution to reduce plastic waste - banning it was.
Answer: D
Recent studies show that despite global efforts to reduce plastic waste by banning single-use plastics, the amount of plastic debris washing up on beaches has not decreased. Evidence of this is the consistent volume of plastic waste found during beach cleanups over the past year compared to the previous year. Nevertheless, environmental scientists have not concluded that these bans are ineffective.
Which of the following would, if true, provide the strongest reason for the scientists' reaction to the findings?
A. The production of single-use plastics has been significantly reduced in most countries over the past decade.
B. The amount of plastic waste produced annually varies significantly from year to year.
C. Many countries have implemented strict regulations against the use of single-use plastics in the past few years.
D. Strong ocean currents in the past twelve months have carried more debris to coastal areas than usual.
E. Plastic waste can persist in the ocean environment for hundreds of years before decomposing.
Correct Answer: D. Strong ocean currents in the past twelve months have carried more debris to coastal areas than usual.
Option D provides the reason for why environmental scientists might hesitate to declare the bans on single-use plastics ineffective. If unusual ocean currents have affected the distribution of plastic debris, this would explain why there hasn’t been a noticeable decrease in waste on beaches year over year and thus why the scientist felt the ban was not ineffective.
A. The production of single-use plastics has been significantly reduced in most countries over the past decade.
This is the opposite answer choice from what we are looking for. This would make the paradox worse. Lots of plastics production has been reduced and yet we are seeing no results year over year. Bans are clearly not working unless there is an explanation but this choice does not explain why the same amount of plastics is washing up. Eliminate it.
B. The amount of plastic waste produced annually varies significantly from year to year.
If the amount of plastic waste produced annual varies, why has the same amount washing out on the beaches? Also, why would the scientist feel that the bans were not ineffective if the results were inconclusive? What would be the basis of their judgement? This answer choice is a contender but it is incomplete and we should try to find a better one as this one leaves too many gaps.
C. Many countries have implemented strict regulations against the use of single-use plastics in the past few years.
This answer choice similar to A does not address why the same amount of plastics is washing up on the beaches, and why despite the same amount washing up, scientists felt their ban was effective.
E. Plastic waste can persist in the ocean environment for hundreds of years before decomposing.
As is, E) does not explain the paradox: 1) constant levels of waste washing up year over year and 2) why the scientists felt the ban was not ineffective.
In the passage, scientists are measuring the ban effectiveness with the plastic debris washing up, and they are not seeing any difference year over year. E) does not explain why the amount of plastic washing up is constant despite the ban (source) which should have reduced the input. Plastic clearly did not decompose (duh) but the amount of plastics should have reduced year over year if the bans were working (it is implied in the question that a reduction was expected).
Note that E) does not mean that plastics take hundreds of years to wash ashore or that there is a delay in banning and seeing results for hundreds of years. Decomposing was never a solution to reduce plastic waste - banning it was.
Answer: D
28 Nov 2024, 21:01
Kudos
Bookmarks
I think this is a high-quality question and I agree with explanation.
