PrepTest 134, Section 3, Question 19
The conventional process for tanning leather uses large(71 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(7 more words not shown)
- ALeather tanned using(15 more words not shown)
- BThe biological catalysts(20 more words not shown)
- CNew technological innovations(16 more words not shown)
- DDisposal of tanning(23 more words not shown)
- EThe labor costs(21 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Less waste doesn't necessarily mean a smaller disposal bill. What kind of waste are we dealing with?
Imagine one process leaves behind scraps of ordinary paper and another leaves behind hazardous radioactive material. Even a smaller quantity of the second material could cost far more to handle safely. That's an illustration of why quantity alone doesn't settle disposal cost, not a claim that these biological catalysts produce radioactive waste.
The argument has already made the other costs about equal. It expressly leaves disposal out of that comparison, then uses nearly twenty percent less waste to predict a lower total cost. So disposal is exactly where we need to look. If the biological waste costs much more to dispose of per unit, its smaller amount might not save anything.
What we’re looking for
For the required assumption, I want that possible extra disposal expense kept from swallowing the savings. We don't need the two wastes to be identical. We need the move from less waste to a lower overall cost to have a sound basis.
Working the answers
- A
Leather quality isn't the conclusion. One process could make better leather while the other costs less. The argument is comparing production costs, so it doesn't require this particular ranking of the resulting leather's quality.
- B
The catalysts don't have to be cheaper by weight. A process might use a smaller amount of a more expensive ingredient, or balance that expense with savings elsewhere. We already have the premise that overall costs excluding disposal are about equal. The price per unit of one input doesn't need to favor the biological process.
- C
We don't need a recent technological improvement to explain why the biological process has these costs. It might have worked this way for years. The question is whether the stated cost comparison supports the conclusion, not how the process reached its present level of efficiency.
- DCorrect
This addresses the missing price comparison: disposing of the same amount of biological waste must not cost significantly more. If that disposal were much more expensive, producing nearly twenty percent less waste might still leave a larger bill. For example, eighty units costing twice as much per unit would cost more to dispose of than one hundred ordinary units. D blocks the kind of difference that could defeat the supposed saving.
- E
Individual labor costs can be higher even when total costs excluding disposal are about the same. Other savings could offset the extra labor. The premise already compares those combined costs; it doesn't require every component to be no greater under the biological method. The unresolved comparison is the expense left out: waste disposal.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.