One variety of partially biodegradable plastic beverage container is

Question

One variety of partially biodegradable plastic beverage container is manufactured from small bits of plastic bound together by a degradable bonding agent such as cornstarch. Since only the bonding agent degrades, leaving the small bits of plastic, no less plastic refuse per container is produced when such containers are discarded than when comparable nonbiodegradable containers are discarded.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument above?

(A) Both partially biodegradable and nonbiodegradable plastic beverage containers can be crushed completely flat by refuse compactors.

(B) The partially biodegradable plastic beverage containers are made with more plastic than comparable nonbiodegradable ones in order to compensate for the weakening effect of the bonding agents.

(C) Many consumers are ecology-minded and prefer to buy a product sold in the partially biodegradable plastic beverage containers rather than in nonbiodegradable containers, even if the price is higher.

(D) The manufacturing process for the partially biodegradable plastic beverage containers results in less plastic waste than the manufacturing process for nonbiodegradable plastic beverage containers.

(E) Technological problems with recycling currently prevent the reuse as food or beverage containers of the plastic from either type of plastic beverage container.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg12717333-500-the-case-against-recycling-the-uss-waste/

Rathje thinks that attempts to deal with what people perceive to be the plastic problem by means of biodegradable materials are equally misguided. Biodegradable plastic bottles usually use corn starch as a degenerative bonding agent, and they degrade to small pieces of plastic – a pointless exercise when refuse compactors crush the bottles completely flat, he says. In fact, such containers use more plastic because they need to be thicker  to compensate for the weakening effect of the degenerating agent .

marclopato · Accepted Answer

The conclusion of the argument says : you do not throw less plastic away with the bio one than with the normal  when you discard them . But to explain this it only says that plastic and cornstarch are used, it does not say that more plastic is actually in the bottle. But B tells us that !
So B does strengthens the argument.

I also did not have the right vision before Veritas prepcourse, but a very important point is that an assumption strengthens an argument. Even if it only strengthens it a little bit, if it is the one which stengthens it the more compared to the other 4, it is enough.

D tells us about the  waste  of plastic  during the manufacturing process , not about the plastic of the bottle itself, on which you should focus, as the argument focuses on the refuse (=garbage) => D is out of scope.

GMATPill · Answer

Some of you may be confused on the wording here:

"no less plastic refuse per container is produced"

This is the same as "the same (or even more) plastic refuse per container is produced"

You don't need to know what "plastic refuse" is....but the idea is that when comparing the two approaches, the *same or more* amount of plastic is produced. Why?

We have a hint -- but the hint does not entirely give the explanation. THat hint his:

"Since only the bonding agent degrades, leaving the small bits of plastic..."

b14kumar · Answer

Thanks guys.

OA is B.

 OE: 

 The information that strengthens the arguement will be about the subjects of the arguement, not about tangential issues. In this case, discovering that the partially biodegradable containers use more plastic than comparable non-biodegradable one in order to compensate for the weakness of the biodegradable bonding agent would strengthen the arguement. 

Regards,
Brajesh

hanumayamma · Answer

Conclusion: Biodegradable (B) and non- biodegradable (NB) containers generate same amount of plastic waste per container

Weakens conclusion:

(A)Both partially biodegradable and non-biodegradable plastic beverage containers can be crushed completely flat by refuse compactors  The argument is about plastic waste per container (Biodegradable (B) and non- biodegradable (NB)). Therefore this is completely irrelevant to the argument – Eliminate it ]
(B)The partially biodegradable plastic beverage container is made with more plastic than comparable non-biodegradable ones in order to compensate for the weakening effect of the bonding agents  weakens the argument that both B and N-B generates same waste per container - hold it ].
(C)Many consumers are ecology-minded and prefer to buy a product sold in partially biodegradable plastic beverage containers rather than in non-biodegradable containers, even if the price is higher.  This argument is not about consumer buying habits – Eliminate it ]
(D)The manufacturing process for partially biodegradable plastic beverage containers results in less plastic than the manufacturing plastic beverage containers.  This argument is not about manufacturing process of Biodegradable OR non- biodegradable – Eliminate it ]
(E) Technological problems with recycling currently prevent the reuse as food or beverage containers of the plastic from either type of plastic beverage container.  Technological usage or problems are definately out of the scope of the argument – Eliminate it ]

Answer: B

LM · Answer

Weakens:
Conclusion is that " no less plastic refuse per container is produced when such container are discarded than when comparable nonbiodegradable containers are discarded."

"D": This indicates that the conclusion isn't true, because for partially biodegradable plastic beverage containers results in less plastic than the manufacturing plastic beverage containers. So it's not same as the conclusion says.

Strengthens:
Conclusion is that " no less plastic refuse per container is produced when such container are discarded than when comparable non biodegradable containers are discarded."

"B": This supports the conclusion that using partially biodegradable plastic beverage containers is not going to result in less plastic refuse because already it needs more plastic in order to compensate for the weak bonding agents.

Please Post the OA.

PGTLrowanhand · Answer

The difficulty here is that the argument stresses that there is NO INHERENT BENEFIT to this type of bottle.

Thus, STRENGTHENING is something to say that this type of bottle is BAD (B).

Weakening would be to say that it is good (D).

A) is Out of Scope because it talks about being crushed flat, not waste per bottle as in the argument.

C) is Out of Scope because it is about customer preference, not about amount of waste per bottle.

E) is Out of Scope because it is about HOW the bottle will be reused, not the amount of waste per bottle.

doe007 · Answer

From the first statement, if seems that partially biodegradable plastic container leaves less plastic refuse than the comparable nonbiodegradable container. However, the assertion in the last sentence of the argument is opposite to the apparent implication of first sentence. This could be possible if, for some reason, partially biodegradable plastic containers are made with more plastic than the comparable nonbiodegradable containers.

A) Out of scope. This statement does not provide any information on how the plastic refuse from partially biodegradable plastic container can be equal or more than that from comparable nonbiodegradable container.

B)  Correct . This statement conveys that partially biodegradable plastic containers contain more plastic than comparable nonbiodegradable ones.

C) Out of scope. Consumers' preference has no significance on the comparison between comparable partially biodegradable and nonbiodegradable container's plastic refuses. First of, preference does not mean it is happening in reality. Secondly, even if it is happening in reality, consumers' preference may affect the total number of partially biodegradable plastic containers whereas our concern is to compare the plastic refuse of one unit of partially biodegradable container with the plastic refuse of one unit of comparable nonbiodegradable container.

D) Out of scope. First of all, the argument is focused on disposal of plastic containers and not manufacturing of plastic containers. Secondly, we are concerned about plastic refuse after disposal of the bottles and not the plastic wastes during manufacturing.

E) Out of scope. This statement does not provide any information on how the plastic refuse from partially biodegradable plastic container can be equal or more than that from comparable nonbiodegradable container. This statement is concerned about discontinuation of recycling and that is equally applicable to biodegradable and nonbiodegradable containers.

Correct answer is B.

WaterFlowsUp · Answer

This Q is present in Both OG 12 and 13. This is a strengthen question. 
I am providing the solutions for those who may need it in future. 
A. Crushed completely Flat -- > Does this measure qty. of plastic used in both? What if they were of different dimensions!
B. Partial containers have more plastic than non-biodegradable ones. Sounds good , let's hold on to that. 
C. So what if consumers prefers something ?
D. We are not interested in the manufacturing process, we want to strengthen the end result. 
E. Same as D. Why do we think of tech problems?

OA is B

BrainLab · Answer

Premise: Since only the bonding agent degrades, leaving the small bits of plastic
Conclusion:  no less  plastic refuse per container is produced when such containers are discarded than when comparable nonbiodegradable containers are discarded. --> So, we need an asnwer choice that says Plastic in Bio => Plastic in NON-Bio -> (B) gives us such Information.

B) The partially biodegradable plastic beverage containers are made  with more plastic  than comparable nonbiodegradable ones in order to compensate for the weakening effect of the bounding agents.

smmunna · Answer

First, we're trying to show that the partially biodegradable container produces no less plastic when it's discarded, not when it's produced, so D is outside the scope.

Moreover, the point of the argument is that the biodegradable container is no better than the alternative, whereas D does the opposite.

B, however, strengthens the notion that the partially biodegradable option is no better than the alternative.

shob22 · Answer

GMATNinja  Please help me with this question. Why is B correct?

GMATNinja · Answer

In the passage, the author compares two kinds of containers:

nonbiodegradable containers, and 
 partially biodegradable containers

The partially biodegradable containers are made of small bits of plastic stuck together with a bonding agent. The bonding agent degrades, but the small bits of plastic remain.

From this, the author concludes that "no less plastic refuse per container is produced when   are discarded than when comparable nonbiodegradable containers are discarded."

In other words, these partially biodegradable containers are  just as bad, if not WORSE  than the regular, nonbiodegradable containers.

That's weird -- surely if a container can partially degrade, then it should leave behind LESS refuse than a regular container? Not according to the author.

The correct answer choice will strengthen the author's argument that the partially biodegradable containers are just as bad/worse than the regular containers.

Here's (B):
 
(B) tells us that there's a problem with the partially biodegradable containers. The bonding agents holding the bits of plastic together have a "weakening effect" on the container.

To compensate for this effect, the partially biodegradable containers have to be made with MORE plastic than the regular containers. This explains why the partially biodegradable containers leave behind more plastic refuse -- the "small bits of plastic" left behind actually amount to MORE plastic than is left behind by a regular container.

So, (B) strengthens the author's argument.

I hope that helps!

AhmedMoharam89 · Answer

Honestly, I chose D just because I didn't fully understand the argument. "no less plastic refuse" this what I mainly didn't understand.

Refuse what? or what is refused? what does refuse mean here?

GMATNinja · Answer

Good question. In this context, "refuse" is actually another synonym for "garbage" or "trash" (the stuff that we "refuse" I guess?). And yes, that's confusing, since the word "refuse" has a completely different definition that has nothing to do with garbage. It's even pronounced differently. English is great, right?

AhmedMoharam89 · Answer

GMATNinja  thank you for the reply.

May I ask you, how can a non-native ,like mysef, deal with such issue, facing unusual vocab that obstructs the meaning?

A huge number of incorrect answers that I make is because I face a word or two that I don’t know the meaning of and I end up picking the wrong answers because of these words.

This also happens a lot in RC.

Thanks

Posted from my mobile device

GMATNinja · Answer

When you don't know a particular word, your only option is to try to work out the meaning of that word from context clues in the rest of the passage. Sometimes you have enough clues to do this, and sometimes you don't. This particular question doesn't give us too many hints to infer what "refuse" means, unfortunately.

If you can't figure out the definition of a particular word, just try to assess how well you understand the passage without that word. In RC, it's unlikely that the entire meaning of the passage depends on the definition of a single word, so you can just move forward with the stuff that you DO understand. If you're really struggling to make sense of a CR or RC question because of vocabulary issues, though, it may be best to skip that particular question and save that time for another problem.

Finally, if this happens a lot then you might need to expand your vocabulary before you take the test. We generally don't recommend flashcards -- instead, spend time reading tough material. That way, you can practice picking up context clues when you come across a new word and attempting to infer a definition. Then, after you finish your reading for the day, look up the actual definitions of those words and add them to your repertoire. A word of caution: it takes time to build your vocabulary, and there aren't any really quick fixes.

Check out  this article  for nonfiction reading recommendations, and  this article  for fiction recommendations.

I hope that helps a bit!

vv65 · Answer

AhmedMoharam89 
Unfortunately, there is no quick and easy solution for this problem. The GMAT is conducted in English, and it assumes a certain level of familiarity with the language. This is the main reason why GMAT tutors recommend regular reading. 
Even someone with an Einstein-level IQ will struggle if he/she does not know English well enough. The person may end up doing very well, but it will require more effort.

Noida · Answer

Hi  GMATNinja ,

Thank you for providing such a wonderful explanation.

What I understood from your lucid explanation is the following:

If both bio-degradable (B) and non-biodegradable (N) are made from the same amount of plastic, B will leave less waste as it is partially biodegradable.

But the argument says that B leaves same or more waste when compared to N. This is only possible when B is made from more amount of plastic.

However, I have another doubt here. Request to kindly guide on this:

Let’s say that B is made from 110 gram of plastic and leaves a waste of 100 grams. (As it it partially biodegradable)
And N is made from 100 grams of plastic and leaves a waste of 100 grams. (As it is not biodegradable)

Doesn’t this mean that B is better than N, because B is using more plastic but producing less waste.

The flaw in this argument is that we don’t know the breakup of the amount wasted in manufacturing B and the amount that gets partially biodegraded.

Maybe my thinking is tangential to the requirements of the question. Can you please shed some clarity so that I can direct my efforts in the right direction?

GMATNinja · Answer

There are a couple of issues to work through here.

The first is that the passage tells us that "ONLY the bonding agent degrades," meaning that ALL of the plastic does  not  degrade. So, in your example, it's impossible for the partially biodegradable container to use 110 grams of plastic and leave 100 grams of waste. If the container uses 110 grams of plastic, then it must leave 110 grams of plastic waste.

(B) tells us that the "partially biodegradable plastic beverage containers are made with more plastic," so we know that these containers are producing more plastic waste than their counterparts.

The second thing to consider is that the question asks us which answer choice most strengthens the argument, not which answer choice PROVES that the argument must be correct. So, even if there is some valid edge case in which the answer choice doesn't 100% prove the validity of the argument, that's ok. It's enough to just provide more support for the argument than is provided by the other options.

I hope that helps!

One variety of partially biodegradable plastic beverage container is

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

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

One variety of partially biodegradable plastic beverage container is

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