Last visit was: 26 Apr 2026, 07:27 It is currently 26 Apr 2026, 07:27
Home
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
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 
505-555 (Easy)|   Complete the Passage|                                       
avatar
nkshmalik1
avatar
Joined: 01 Jan 2019
Last visit: 10 Nov 2022
Posts: 29
Own Kudos:
13
Given Kudos: 142
Posts: 29
Kudos: 13
Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades 20 Jul 2022, 07:17
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi GMATNinja AjiteshArun,

I was going through the explanation and found that I missed something.

I rejected B because proportion of population owning automobile will increase doesn't solidify the idea that new oil field would not overshoot the consumption of oil domestically. It may or may not.

I chose E - many new oil field are likely to be 'as productive as' those that were developing during the period when Utrania was a major oil exporter.

If that is true the amount of oil produced will be equal to the oil produced when the country was the highest exporter.

This will lead to same quantity of oil production and thus not higher oil exports.

Could you please help me understand?

Thanks,
Ankush

Thanks

GMATNinja
The author would like to reach the following conclusion: "it would be premature to conclude that the rapid development of new fields will result in higher oil exports." Let's consider what we have so far...

  • Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter. The word "formerly" tells us that Utrania is no longer a major petroleum exporter.
  • Why is Utrania no longer a major petroleum exporter? It seems as though economic stagnation and restrictive regulations inhibited investment in new oil fields in recent decades.
  • As a result, oil exports from Utrania dropped steadily as the old fields became depleted. In other words, they were using up the OLD supplies. Since investment in NEW fields was restricted, the overall supply steadily decreased. This led to a decrease in exports.
  • Now things are changing again. Economic conditions are improving in Utrania, and the regulations are now less restrictive. As a result, new fields will be developed rapidly, helping to replenish the decreasing supply.
  • But the author is reluctant to conclude that this rapid development will lead to higher oil exports.

So we are looking for something that would explain why EXPORTS might not increase even if new fields (new sources of oil) are rapidly developed. Notice that the author is not saying that the exports will DEFINITELY not increase. Rather, the author is merely suggesting that we don't know yet. In other words, it would be "premature" to conclude that the rapid development will result in higher oil exports.

(And if you prefer your explanations in video form, check out this YouTube CR webinar.)

Quote:
A. the price of oil is expected to remain relatively stable over the next several years.
The author expects the supply of oil to increase but does NOT expect exports to increase... why not? Perhaps if the price of oil were expected to plummet, it would not make economic sense to export the oil. But if the price of oil is expected to remain stable, we would expect an increase in supply to cause an increase in exports. Choice (A) does not explain this apparent discrepancy, so it can be eliminated.

Quote:
B. the improvement in the economic situation in Utrania is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the proportion of Utranian's who own automobiles.
We know that the new fields will help replenish the supply of oil, so why won't Utrania export that oil? Well, perhaps the demand for oil IN Utrania will increase. If the improvement in economic conditions causes a dramatic increase in automobile ownership, then we can expect an increase in domestic demand for oil to fuel those automobiles. So even though Utrania will be PRODUCING more oil, a larger chunk of that production will have to stay in Utrania to meet the increased domestic demand. This explains how supply could increase without an increase in exports, so hang on to choice (B).

Quote:
C. most of the investment in the oil fields in Utrania is expected to come from foreign sources.
It doesn't matter where the investment comes from. If we are rapidly developing new oil fields, we should increase the supply of oil. If we increase the supply of oil, why won't exports also increase? Choice (C) does not address this apparent discrepancy and can be eliminated.

Quote:
D. new technology is available to recover oil from old oil fields formerly regarded as depleted.
We already know that the new fields will increase the supply of oil. Choice (D) gives us even MORE reason to expect that oil supplies will increase. Not only do we have the oil from the new fields, but we'll also be able to squeeze some more oil out of the "depleted" fields. This further suggests that exports will increase and does not explain the author's conclusion. Eliminate (D).

Quote:
E. many of the new oil fields in Utrania are likely to be as productive as those that were developing during the period when Utrania was a major oil exporter.
Choice (E) might be tempting if it said that the new fields are NOT likely to be as productive as those developed when Utrania was a major exporter. If that were the case, we would have to doubt whether the rapid development would lead to a substantial increase in the supply of oil. However, as written, choice (E) simply gives us more reason to think that the new fields SHOULD lead to an increase in oil exports. This does not match the author's conclusion, so (E) can be eliminated.

Choice (B) is the best answer.
Show more
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 24 Apr 2026
Posts: 6,079
Own Kudos:
5,140
 [1]
Given Kudos: 744
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 6,079
Kudos: 5,140
 [1]
Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades 21 Jul 2022, 00:32
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
nkshmalik1
Hi GMATNinja AjiteshArun,

I was going through the explanation and found that I missed something.

I rejected B because proportion of population owning automobile will increase doesn't solidify the idea that new oil field would not overshoot the consumption of oil domestically. It may or may not.

I chose E - many new oil field are likely to be 'as productive as' those that were developing during the period when Utrania was a major oil exporter.

If that is true the amount of oil produced will be equal to the oil produced when the country was the highest exporter.

This will lead to same quantity of oil production and thus not higher oil exports.

Could you please help me understand?

Thanks,
Ankush
Show more
Hi nkshmalik1,

You may be looking at the earliest mention of exports, whereas "higher" here is relative to the current (low) exports. Look at it this way: the country was a major exporter, but then exports dropped steadily. Now, even with {improving economy and less restrictive regulations}, it'd be premature to conclude that exports will go up. Up from the current levels, not the original levels.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 24 Apr 2026
Posts: 7,391
Own Kudos:
70,814
 [2]
Given Kudos: 2,132
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,391
Kudos: 70,814
 [2]
Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades 24 Jul 2022, 20:36
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
nkshmalik1
Hi GMATNinja AjiteshArun,

I was going through the explanation and found that I missed something.

I rejected B because proportion of population owning automobile will increase doesn't solidify the idea that new oil field would not overshoot the consumption of oil domestically. It may or may not.

I chose E - many new oil field are likely to be 'as productive as' those that were developing during the period when Utrania was a major oil exporter.

If that is true the amount of oil produced will be equal to the oil produced when the country was the highest exporter.

This will lead to same quantity of oil production and thus not higher oil exports.

Could you please help me understand?

Thanks,
Ankush

Thanks
Show more
AjiteshArun is spot-on about (E)!

One more thought on (B): sure, the proportion of the population with cars doesn't 100% PROVE that oil exports will be higher. That's totally ok -- we don't need an answer choice that proves that the conclusion is correct. Instead, we just need to choose the answer choice that "most logically completes the argument." (B) gives us a potential piece of support for the conclusion, so it does indeed logically complete the argument.

None of the other options provide any support, so (B) is the best answer.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
vanquisher
User avatar
Joined: 18 Feb 2026
Last visit: 25 Apr 2026
Posts: 6
Own Kudos:
1
Given Kudos: 12
Posts: 6
Kudos: 1
Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades 31 Mar 2026, 05:22
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Why is this question classified as Hard in the Critical Reasoning section of the Official Verbal Review?
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 26 Apr 2026
Posts: 109,837
Own Kudos:
811,378
Given Kudos: 105,895
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 109,837
Kudos: 811,378
Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades 31 Mar 2026, 05:28
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
vanquisher
Why is this question classified as Hard in the Critical Reasoning section of the Official Verbal Review?
Show more

At GMAT Club, the difficulty level of a question is determined automatically once there are enough attempts via the Timer. It’s based on several parameters from users’ activity, such as the percentage of correct answers and the average time taken.

So while our categorization (Easy, Medium, Hard) generally lines up with the Official Guide’s classification, it’s not always identical because it reflects actual performance data from our pool of users.
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
AbhishekP220108
506 posts
bhanu29
361 posts