Thanks Chiranjeev.. I think i missed the portion of the question that talks about reducing the ash to half of last year.In that case, i think only D makes sense.
I have to say your analogy makes it super clear. Thanks again.
I dont know how to give kudos on my phone![:)]( "Smile")
Hi Pavan,
Let me explain option D with an analogy here.
Let's suppose if a doctor makes the following suggestion to you.
You need to reduce your calorie intake to half the current levels. Therefore, you should eat half as much as you currently eat. (so if you eat say 20 units, now you should eat 10 units)
Now, for the doctor's suggestion to work (i.e. reduce calorie intake to half the current levels), you should not eat, say, oily foods which contain more calories per unit. If you do that, even though you may eat only 10 units of food but your actual calorie intake will not be half of your previous level since you are eating more oily foods now which are providing you more calories per unit.
Therefore, for doctor's suggestion to achieve its aim (reduce calorie intake to half), the amount of calories per unit of food should not increase from last year.
Do you get this?
Exactly parallel is the reasoning used in option D.
You want to reduce residual ash to half the amount. What you do is that you reduce the number of trucks to half. Would that achieve the objective.
The answer is yes but only if you don't load each truck with more residual ash than the year before.
Does this help?
Thanks,
Chiranjeev
Posted from my mobile device![Image]()
I have to say your analogy makes it super clear. Thanks again.
I dont know how to give kudos on my phone
egmat wrote:
pavan2185 wrote:
Hi ,
Please help me here.
I am not able to get why choice D is the correct answer. I was completely stumped.
Below is my analysis.
Which of the following is required for the revamped collection program to achieve its aim?
(A) This year, no materials that city services could separate for recycling will be incinerated.
Initial thought:
Completely lost among most of the choices and chose this just for the sake of choosing an answer since I had already taken about 4 mins.
Later evaluation.
This choice says no materials will be incinerated. The target is not to completely avoid incineration. Only portion of it is to be recycled. This is not the requirement / Assumption clearly.
(B) Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose of the residual ash.
OFS. Cost is not the concern.
(C) Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year.
The proportion of recyclable material to refuse is relevant but not the proportion of the recyclable materials between the two years.
(D) The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residual ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year.
Initial thought: I thought the Ash per truck load is not relevant since we care about the number of truck loads of refuse to be burnt.
Later revleation.
This is the correct answer. However, is a truck load of refuse to be burnt equal to truck load of ash? I am not able to understand this properly.
(E) The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city service's this year will be no greater than that collected last year.
The total quantity is not relevant. OFS. We are concerned with the number of truck loads of trash.
Please help me here.
I am not able to get why choice D is the correct answer. I was completely stumped.
Below is my analysis.
Which of the following is required for the revamped collection program to achieve its aim?
(A) This year, no materials that city services could separate for recycling will be incinerated.
Initial thought:
Completely lost among most of the choices and chose this just for the sake of choosing an answer since I had already taken about 4 mins.
Later evaluation.
This choice says no materials will be incinerated. The target is not to completely avoid incineration. Only portion of it is to be recycled. This is not the requirement / Assumption clearly.
(B) Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose of the residual ash.
OFS. Cost is not the concern.
(C) Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year.
The proportion of recyclable material to refuse is relevant but not the proportion of the recyclable materials between the two years.
(D) The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residual ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year.
Initial thought: I thought the Ash per truck load is not relevant since we care about the number of truck loads of refuse to be burnt.
Later revleation.
This is the correct answer. However, is a truck load of refuse to be burnt equal to truck load of ash? I am not able to understand this properly.
(E) The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city service's this year will be no greater than that collected last year.
The total quantity is not relevant. OFS. We are concerned with the number of truck loads of trash.
Hi Pavan,
Let me explain option D with an analogy here.
Let's suppose if a doctor makes the following suggestion to you.
You need to reduce your calorie intake to half the current levels. Therefore, you should eat half as much as you currently eat. (so if you eat say 20 units, now you should eat 10 units)
Now, for the doctor's suggestion to work (i.e. reduce calorie intake to half the current levels), you should not eat, say, oily foods which contain more calories per unit. If you do that, even though you may eat only 10 units of food but your actual calorie intake will not be half of your previous level since you are eating more oily foods now which are providing you more calories per unit.
Therefore, for doctor's suggestion to achieve its aim (reduce calorie intake to half), the amount of calories per unit of food should not increase from last year.
Do you get this?
Exactly parallel is the reasoning used in option D.
You want to reduce residual ash to half the amount. What you do is that you reduce the number of trucks to half. Would that achieve the objective.
The answer is yes but only if you don't load each truck with more residual ash than the year before.
Does this help?
Thanks,
Chiranjeev
Posted from my mobile device
