loco00 Posted September 6, 2006 Share Posted September 6, 2006 can anyone explain this? For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito have been damaged by exhaust from many tour buses that come to the city. There has been little parking space, so most buses have idled at the curb during each stop on thier tour, and idling produces as much exhaust as driving. The city has now provided parking that accomodates a third of the tour buses, so damage to Palitito's buildings from teh buses' exhaust will diminish significantly. Which of the follwing, if true, most strongly supports the arguement? A) The exhaust from Palitito's few automobiles is not a significant threat to Palitito's buildings B) Palitito's Renaissance buildings are not threatened by pollution other than engine exhaust C) Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transporting passengers from one site to another D) Most tourists come to Palitoto by tour bus than by any other single means of transportation E) Some fo the tour buses that are unable to find parking drive around Palitito while their passengers are visting a site Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kk_del Posted September 6, 2006 Share Posted September 6, 2006 I think it will be C .. .since the remaining time the buses will be at parking lot so there will be no exhaust ans thus will not damage the buildings ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereobag Posted September 6, 2006 Share Posted September 6, 2006 i think its D, since it supports the argument by saying that buses are the single source of transportation and by providing ample parking space we can have significant pollution reduction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kk_del Posted September 6, 2006 Share Posted September 6, 2006 i over looked it ,,,,D seems more stronger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vedigaurav Posted September 7, 2006 Share Posted September 7, 2006 C is correct. C reads that "Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transporting passengers from one site to another". It means that Atleast 75% of the time, buses are idled at the curb and and idling produces as much exhaust as driving as is evident from the argument. This supports the argument. Once the parking is provided, it will accomodate a third of the tour buses reducing the pollution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay711 Posted September 7, 2006 Share Posted September 7, 2006 For D, first, the argument talking exclusively about tour buses and the exhaust from tour buses. so the exhaust from cars or any other vehicles would be out of the scope of this argument. Second, the parking is provided for 1/3 of the buses, so regardless whether people use buses more than other means of transportation neither effect the number of parking space provided nor the increase in number of buses. I pick C. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catchkedar Posted September 7, 2006 Share Posted September 7, 2006 We hav nothing to do with any other means of transport or any other means of pollution. Arguments states that parking provided for third of buses will reduce damage to building. So the only supporting argument is C. If buses are idle for 75% of the time & if there is no enough space for their parking all buses will be idle at curb during each stop. As idling process is as much exhaust as driving, pollution exist. If we can give enough paking space for those buses definitely pollution from idling will reduce making it better for building. So C should be the answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msps3000 Posted September 7, 2006 Share Posted September 7, 2006 i pick C. what is OA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khilona Posted September 7, 2006 Share Posted September 7, 2006 C seems fine. Agree with the explainations given by Kedar and Gaurav Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loco00 Posted September 9, 2006 Author Share Posted September 9, 2006 OA was C Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nagar Posted September 13, 2006 Share Posted September 13, 2006 C is clear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeJung Posted September 15, 2006 Share Posted September 15, 2006 clear with C. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pelopinch Posted September 3, 2007 Share Posted September 3, 2007 Could someone explain what is wrong with E? Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aru4912 Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I too have the same question. How do we eliminate E ? lsr or lego - if you guys are planning to answer GMAT prep questions, pls help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lsr Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 I too have the same question. How do we eliminate E ? lsr or lego - if you guys are planning to answer GMAT prep questions, pls help. For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito have been damaged by exhaust from many tour buses that come to the city. There has been little parking space, so most buses have idled at the curb during each stop on thier tour, and idling produces as much exhaust as driving. The city has now provided parking that accomodates a third of the tour buses, so damage to Palitito's buildings from the buses' exhaust will diminish significantly. Which of the follwing, if true, most strongly supports the arguement? We are looking for a statement that will support a significant decrease in future damage to Palitito's buildings due to buses's exhaust. C) Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transporting passengers from one site to another This statement tells us that more than 75% of the time tour buses are either parked (if parking is available) or produce exhaust because of lack of parking space; thus by providing more parking space, the exhuast levels will decrease significantly. E) Some of the tour buses that are unable to find parking drive around Palitito while their passengers are visting a site From the argument we know that driving and idling produces the same amount of exhaust, so in essence this statement does not add nor subtract from the argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaushikt Posted September 26, 2007 Share Posted September 26, 2007 one more vore for C Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
humtum0 Posted October 9, 2007 Share Posted October 9, 2007 E is also limited in the scope as it's focussed on 'SOME' buses. Correct answer is C Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rohit.chetty Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 For years the beautiful Renaissance buildings in Palitito have been damaged by exhaust from many tour buses that come to the city. There has been little parking space, so most buses have idled at the curb during each stop on thier tour, and idling produces as much exhaust as driving. The city has now provided parking that accomodates a third of the tour buses, so damage to Palitito's buildings from the buses' exhaust will diminish significantly. Which of the follwing, if true, most strongly supports the arguement? We are looking for a statement that will support a significant decrease in future damage to Palitito's buildings due to buses's exhaust. C) Tour buses typically spend less than one-quarter of the time they are in Palitito transporting passengers from one site to another This statement tells us that more than 75% of the time tour buses are either parked (if parking is available) or produce exhaust because of lack of parking space; thus by providing more parking space, the exhuast levels will decrease significantly. E) Some of the tour buses that are unable to find parking drive around Palitito while their passengers are visting a site From the argument we know that driving and idling produces the same amount of exhaust, so in essence this statement does not add nor subtract from the argument. But lsr, driving around produces as much exhaust as idling does, and these buses drive around as they are unable to find parking space. so by providing parking space, aren't we going to reduce the number of buses driving around which would ultimately reduce as much exhaust as from idling buses and thereby reduce damage? how would you answer this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vineetdixit Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 D is out of scope. as the questions is about the relation between the tour buses and their impact on the building. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vineetdixit Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 E actually weakens the argument as it talks about a flaw in the reasoning that has been given in the question Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick312 Posted October 12, 2007 Share Posted October 12, 2007 Imo C Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lsr Posted October 14, 2007 Share Posted October 14, 2007 But lsr, driving around produces as much exhaust as idling does, and these buses drive around as they are unable to find parking space. so by providing parking space, aren't we going to reduce the number of buses driving around which would ultimately reduce as much exhaust as from idling buses and thereby reduce damage? how would you answer this? Sorry for the long delay, I have just seen your post. We are looking for a statement that would provide the strongest support for a significant reduction in demage. Let's assume that the tour buses spend 95% of time driving around, and only 5% of the time in need of parking. In such a case providing more parking will not result in a significant reduction in demage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rohit.chetty Posted October 16, 2007 Share Posted October 16, 2007 Sorry for the long delay, I have just seen your post. We are looking for a statement that would provide the strongest support for a significant reduction in demage. Let's assume that the tour buses spend 95% of time driving around, and only 5% of the time in need of parking. In such a case providing more parking will not result in a significant reduction in demage. hmmm yeah got it. thanx a lot dude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bose Posted September 8, 2008 Share Posted September 8, 2008 imo C- parking helps as more time is spent by buses being idle at the curb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.