Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack
GMAT Club

 It is currently 30 Mar 2017, 17:40

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# When the supply of a given resource dwindles, alternative

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
Director
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 598
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 227 [0], given: 0

When the supply of a given resource dwindles, alternative [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Mar 2005, 10:42
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

When the supply of a given resource dwindles, alternative technologies allowing the use of different resources develop, and demand for the resource that was in short supply naturally declines. Then the existing supplies of that resource satisfy whatever demand remains. Among the once-dwindling resources that are now in more than adequate supply are flint for arrowheads, trees usable for schooner masts, and good mules. Because new technologies constantly replace old ones, we can never run out of important natural resources.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the conclusion?
(A) The masts and hulls of some sailing ships built today are still made of wood.
(B) There are considerably fewer mules today than there were 100 years ago.
(C) The cost of some new technologies is often so high that the companies developing them might actually lose money at first.
(D) Dwindling supplies of a natural resource often result in that resourceâ€™s costing more to use.
(E) The biological requirements for substances like clean air and clean water are unaffected by technological change.
_________________

Regards, S

VP
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 1440
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Mar 2005, 11:34
"E"....we have to prove that there r some imp natural resources which doesn't get affected by technologies, so inherent generalization in the stem is not valid.
SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1793
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 100 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Mar 2005, 12:18
Definitely (E).

(E) clearly demonstarates that we will run out of natural resources such as clean Air and water irrespective of which/what technological advances are made.

Last edited by anandnk on 02 Mar 2005, 12:37, edited 1 time in total.
Intern
Joined: 02 Dec 2004
Posts: 9
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

01 Mar 2005, 18:11
Conclusion Says "Because new technologies constantly replace old ones, we can never run out of important natural resources."

To Undermine the conclusion, we have to prove that there are other factors affecting the natural resources and not only the technologies and infact they can be extinct.

A. Says that the same resource is used for more than one application and even if the technology has replaced the use of the resource from one application, the second application still uses it. So it CAN be extinct.

B. Even with all technologies,there are fewer mules. So definately there are other factors afftecing the resource and It can cause its extinction.

To me Both A and B look good. But I guess I'll pick B.
_________________

The biggest risk in life is not taking one!!!

Director
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 598
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 227 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2005, 07:48
I am not sure what i am not getting but I guess technology can surely improve water and air.
Can somebody elaborate the answer plz.
_________________

Regards, S

SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1793
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 100 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2005, 08:23
saurya_s wrote:
I am not sure what i am not getting but I guess technology can surely improve water and air.
Can somebody elaborate the answer plz.

Hi saurya_s,

Please dont apply your knowledge or opinion on the problems. We are supposed only evaluate the argument using only what is stated. So just consider only what the argument has stated. This is the basic mistake everyone makes.

What is the OA anyway?

Cheers,
Anand.
Director
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 598
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 227 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2005, 08:28
Thanks Anand, will keep your suggestion in mind. OA is indeed E.
_________________

Regards, S

VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1218
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 650 [0], given: 0

Re: CR Natural resources [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Mar 2005, 01:51
saurya_s wrote:
When the supply of a given resource dwindles, alternative technologies allowing the use of different resources develop, and demand for the resource that was in short supply naturally declines. Then the existing supplies of that resource satisfy whatever demand remains. Among the once-dwindling resources that are now in more than adequate supply are flint for arrowheads, trees usable for schooner masts, and good mules. Because new technologies constantly replace old ones, we can never run out of important natural resources.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the conclusion?
(A) The masts and hulls of some sailing ships built today are still made of wood.
(B) There are considerably fewer mules today than there were 100 years ago.
(C) The cost of some new technologies is often so high that the companies developing them might actually lose money at first.
(D) Dwindling supplies of a natural resource often result in that resourceâ€™s costing more to use.
(E) The biological requirements for substances like clean air and clean water are unaffected by technological change.

Hello, could someone help me to refute A and B.
In my opinion, A sounds OK.
The argument said that because new technologies constantly replace old ones ......

A said "....are still made of wood....."; i.e., new technologies don't replace old ones.

What's wrong with A?

Thanks
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1218
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 650 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Mar 2005, 23:55
Hello, anandnk,HongHu,

Could you give me any reason to refute choice A and B?

I'd appreciate it.
Director
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 851
Location: Hyderabad
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 106 [0], given: 0

Re: CR Natural resources [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Mar 2005, 00:26
Conclusion of the argument: Because new technologies constantly replace old ones, we can never run out of important natural resources
to undermine this: we need to an option which contradicts this => something which technology can never replace - this is what is stated in E
A--> technology can replace wood with something else and also the wood available now meets the demand of building sailing ships
B --> the number of mules is lesser now -- this does not say why the mule population dwindled (it might not be because technology has replaced mules)

saurya_s wrote:
When the supply of a given resource dwindles, alternative technologies allowing the use of different resources develop, and demand for the resource that was in short supply naturally declines. Then the existing supplies of that resource satisfy whatever demand remains. Among the once-dwindling resources that are now in more than adequate supply are flint for arrowheads, trees usable for schooner masts, and good mules. Because new technologies constantly replace old ones, we can never run out of important natural resources.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the conclusion?
(A) The masts and hulls of some sailing ships built today are still made of wood.
(B) There are considerably fewer mules today than there were 100 years ago.
(C) The cost of some new technologies is often so high that the companies developing them might actually lose money at first.
(D) Dwindling supplies of a natural resource often result in that resourceâ€™s costing more to use.
(E) The biological requirements for substances like clean air and clean water are unaffected by technological change.
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 335 [0], given: 0

Re: CR Natural resources [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Mar 2005, 21:05
Vithal had a good explanation. (And a good style to go with CR questions, which is what I've been trying to promote: to understand the argument first and then work on the choices. )

Argument: When a certain resource becomes scarce, techonology will allow us to switch to other resources and ensure the balance between remaining demand and limited supply for the exaughsting resources.

Ask for undermining argument.

(A) The masts and hulls of some sailing ships built today are still made of wood.
This says that wood is not completely replaced for ship building. It echos the author's argument about remaining demand matching supplies, and does not undermine the argument.

(B) There are considerably fewer mules today than there were 100 years ago.
There may be fewer mules now, but as long as the damand and supply are in balance we are ok. Does not undermine the argument.

(C) The cost of some new technologies is often so high that the companies developing them might actually lose money at first.
Out of scope.

(D) Dwindling supplies of a natural resource often result in that resourceâ€™s costing more to use.
That's exactly what the argument was saying. Because it becomes more expensive people start to switch to other resources, which brings balance to all.

(E) The biological requirements for substances like clean air and clean water are unaffected by technological change.
This gives an example where the exaughsting resource may not be replaced even with new technologies, and thus undermines the argument that we don't need to worry because exaughsting resources always gets to be replaced.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5061
Location: Singapore
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 371 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

06 Mar 2005, 22:56
Excellent ! I got this wrong. I went for A as well. But E is indeed the best choice.
CEO
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3460
Followers: 67

Kudos [?]: 871 [0], given: 781

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 00:37
anandnk wrote:
saurya_s wrote:
I am not sure what i am not getting but I guess technology can surely improve water and air.
Can somebody elaborate the answer plz.

Hi saurya_s,

Please dont apply your knowledge or opinion on the problems. We are supposed only evaluate the argument using only what is stated. So just consider only what the argument has stated. This is the basic mistake everyone makes.

What is the OA anyway?

Cheers,
Anand.

Agree completely with anand.

anand, its very nice of you to help others out.

thanks so much for your time.

Praetorian
07 Mar 2005, 00:37
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
In Sunnyville the new Alternative Energy Action party won 4 26 Oct 2010, 02:26
Economies in which a high percentage of resources are 16 04 Jul 2009, 01:30
President of Central Supply Company: Profits are at an 7 10 Oct 2007, 13:19
If there is an oil-supply disruption resulting in higher 0 10 Sep 2007, 05:20
If there is an oil-supply disruption resulting in higher 0 04 Apr 2007, 08:03
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# When the supply of a given resource dwindles, alternative

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

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO 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®.