GWD2-18

[liwuu]

Question 18:
Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services was incinerated. This incineration generated a large quantity of residue ash. In order to reduce the amount of residue ash Shelbyville generates this year to half of last year’s total, the city has revamped its collection program. This year city services will separate for recycling enough refuse to reduce the number of truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to half of last year’s number.

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.
B.Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose of the residue ash.
C.Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year.
D.The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residue ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year.
E.The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city services this year will be no greater than that collected last year.

答案是D...我想請問一下C為什麼不對?我認為若是可回收的量變少了,那執行回收這個方案就失去了減少ash的效果,因為不可回收部分仍然很多!!是不是我誤會了整個意思呢?

[micht]

Question 18:
Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services was incinerated. This incineration generated a large quantity of residue ash. In order to reduce the amount of residue ash Shelbyville generates this year to half of last year’s total, the city has revamped its collection program. This year city services will separate for recycling enough refuse to reduce the number of truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to half of last year’s number.

Which of the following is required for the revamped collection program to achieve its aim?

C.Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year.
D.The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residue ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year.

答案一定是和 amount of ash有關

[訪客]

把可以incinerate的垃圾減到一半=>ash就會減半
所以D才對
C無法直接說明能使incinerate垃圾減半,OG裡有很多這樣的選項,可以想像,但無法直接推斷
所以要把邏輯式子列出來分析,一看就知道了

[twkevin]

Question 18:
Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services was incinerated. This incineration generated a large quantity of residue ash. In order to reduce the amount of residue ash Shelbyville generates this year to half of last year’s total, the city has revamped its collection program. This year city services will separate for recycling enough refuse to reduce the number of truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to half of last year’s number.

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.
B.Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose of the residue ash.
C.Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year.
D.The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residue ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year.
E.The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city services this year will be no greater than that collected last year.

原文: 原本全部垃圾都燒毀, 為了降低廢氣=>實施垃圾分類,並降低the number of truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to half of last year’s number

C: ... contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials ...
雖然可回收量提高,可是無法瞭解今年要燒毀的量產生的廢氣有多少? X

D:...generate no more residue ash per truckload incinerated...
原文已知降低the number of truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to
half of last year’s number
假設去年總共燒毀10台垃圾車的量(包含可回收)
今年:1/2 * 10 =5
=> 只燒原本的卡車量的一半(原文) , 又每台產生廢氣量不比原本多
=> 可推出今年總廢氣量會降低

E: 雖然refuse no greater than ,可是無法瞭解今年要燒毀的量產生的廢氣有多少?X

[cocaine]

C只有說回收的東西變多,並不代表燒的東西變少..
因為題目沒說垃圾量固定哩,所以小心...

[hwatai]

基本上就twkevin的解釋很正確，我也是想了一會兒才搞懂

我覺得這題蠻刁的　－＿－

題目思維(政府政策)的陷阱是：兩者是反向相關→　回收多廢氣少 or 回收少廢氣多
跟著這個思維走，就會選到C

其實這題的 回收量 與 廢氣產生量 是兩回事，沒有因果關係在

而E也是類似C的錯誤選項，把議題放在更段的"垃圾量"上，當然與廢氣產生多少更無關係了

D選項，套來欣謝忠理的模式，就是 "反駁的反駁" 作支持
關鍵字就是那個no
拿掉no，D就變成反駁的選項了

[JS]

I change my mind again and think the answer is C.

Let's look carefully on the argument. The last sentence wrote “ This year city service will separate for recycling enough refuse to reduce the number of the truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to half of last year’s number.”
So, the answer has to be C the refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year then last. Otherwise the plan won’t work. Because if there are not enough recyclable material collected, the majority of the refuse will have to be incinerated and therefore produce the residue ash.

[chihhan123]

Question 18:
Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services was incinerated. This incineration generated a large quantity of residue ash. In order to reduce the amount of residue ash Shelbyville generates this year to half of last year’s total, the city has revamped its collection program. This year city services will separate for recycling enough refuse to reduce the number of truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to half of last year’s number.

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.
B.Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose of the residue ash.
C.Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year.
D.The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residue ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year.
E.The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city services this year will be no greater than that collected last year.

答案是D...我想請問一下C為什麼不對?我認為若是可回收的量變少了,那執行回收這個方案就失去了減少ash的效果,因為不可回收部分仍然很多!!是不是我誤會了整個意思呢?

原題翻譯

去年City S 所有收的垃圾都拿去焚化.
焚化這些垃圾會產生大量的垃圾殘渣(灰燼)
今年為了減半(焚燒所產生)垃圾殘渣的量(the amount ....of residue ash)
City S改進了他們的收垃圾計畫，
今年的城市服務單位會分離回收足夠的垃圾，
以減少垃圾送焚燒的單位數(以卡車容量計)至去年數量的一半。

問要這個改近計畫達到目標的必要條件(前提)是以下哪個?

說明:

這個計畫的目的是什麼? 是減少垃圾殘渣的「量」吧.

答案(A) 所有被城市服務單位分離(判定)為可回收的垃圾都不會被焚燒，no material... 過於武斷，而且無法保證量能夠減少，若因為城市服務判定的標準過低，可回收垃圾的比例就很少。
答案(B) 與cost無關，容小弟不再贅述。
答案(C) 無關的原因是因為(可能兩年的可回收垃圾的比例是相同，只是去年都沒有做回收的工作)
答案(D) 我認為不是前提的原因是因為，比例的降低不保證量的降低

The refuse incinerated this year 主詞
will generate 動詞Vt
no more 比較級
residue ash per truckload incinerated 受詞(同時也是比較內容)
than did the refuse incinerated last year. 被比較對象

請問誰產生(主詞是誰)? 「今年被燃燒的垃圾」產生
產生什麼? 每單位(以卡車容量為單位)焚燒垃圾所產生的殘渣
比什麼? 每單位(以卡車容量為單位)焚燒垃圾所產生的殘渣
跟誰比? 跟「去年被燃燒的垃圾」比

這句話的句義是，應該這樣引申，燒同樣的多的垃圾，
今年產生的灰比去年少。
(原因沒有說明，可能是技術更好，燒的比較完全，所以殘渣比較少)

注意整句話中的per truckload部分，
與truckloads of refuse to be incinerated不同(題目最後)
前者指單位焚燒而產生灰燼的率，
後者指送去焚燒的量以幾卡車幾卡車做單位

有這樣的共識的話，很抱歉我借用twkevin大大的例子

假設去年總共燒毀10台垃圾車的量(包含可回收)
答案(C)給:今年燒同樣的多的垃圾量，今年產生的灰比去年少。
所以去年10台*每台1噸的垃圾量=10噸的垃圾 →產生20%的灰燼 →產生2頓的灰燼
所以今年10台*每台1噸的垃圾量=10噸的垃圾 →產生10%的灰燼 →產生1頓的灰燼
(假設今年燒的垃圾量與去年相同，但因技術變好，產生殘渣率降低)

看起來似乎對，但是這個例子是在兩年的垃圾量相同的條件之下才成立，
產生灰燼的率不能代表量

譬如今年垃圾量暴增，
共有30台*每台1噸的垃圾量=30噸的垃圾 →產生10%的灰燼 →產生3頓的灰燼
總量一樣會上升，無法達到原本計畫降低灰燼總量的目的。

所以我認為
答案(E)對，至少City S收的垃圾量沒有比去年多，否則無法達到計畫的目的。

不知各位大大對這樣的想法，贊同否?

[Calvin]

I go for D, too

E的錯誤在於較少的燃燒的垃圾不代表一定產生較少的ash
因此，惟有D把產生的ash率不變的前提下，才可以保証較少的垃圾量，產生的ash才會少

[liwuu]

原題翻譯

去年City S 所有收的垃圾都拿去焚化.
焚化這些垃圾會產生大量的垃圾殘渣(灰燼)
今年為了減半(焚燒所產生)垃圾殘渣的量(the amount ....of residue ash)
City S改進了他們的收垃圾計畫，
今年的城市服務單位會分離回收足夠的垃圾，
以減少垃圾送焚燒的單位數(以卡車容量計)至去年數量的一半。

問要這個改近計畫達到目標的必要條件(前提)是以下哪個?

說明:

這個計畫的目的是什麼? 是減少垃圾殘渣的「量」吧.

答案(A) 所有被城市服務單位分離(判定)為可回收的垃圾都不會被焚燒，no material... 過於武斷，而且無法保證量能夠減少，
弱音位城市服務判定的標準過低，可回收垃圾的比例就很少。
答案(B) 與cost無關，容小弟不再贅述。
答案(C) 無關的原因是因為(可能兩年的可回收垃圾的比例是相同，只是去年都沒有做回收的工作)
答案(D) 我認為不是前提的原因是因為，比例的降低不保證量的降低

The refuse incinerated this year 主詞
will generate 動詞Vt
no more 比較級
residue ash per truckload incinerated 受詞(同時也是比較內容)
than did the refuse incinerated last year. 被比較對象

請問誰產生(主詞是誰)? 「今年被燃燒的垃圾」產生
產生什麼? 每單位(以卡車容量為單位)焚燒垃圾所產生的殘渣
比什麼? 每單位(以卡車容量為單位)焚燒垃圾所產生的殘渣
跟誰比? 跟「去年被燃燒的垃圾」比

這句話的句義是，應該這樣引申，燒同樣的多的垃圾，
今年產生的灰比去年少。
(原因沒有說明，可能是技術更好，燒的比較完全，所以殘渣比較少)

注意整句話中的per truckload部分，
與truckloads of refuse to be incinerated不同(題目最後)
前者指單位焚燒而產生灰燼的率，
後者指送去焚燒的量以幾卡車幾卡車做單位

有這樣的共識的話，很抱歉我借用twkevin大大的例子

假設去年總共燒毀10台垃圾車的量(包含可回收)
答案(C)給:今年燒同樣的多的垃圾量，今年產生的灰比去年少。
所以去年10台*每台1噸的垃圾量=10噸的垃圾 →產生20%的灰燼 →產生2頓的灰燼
所以今年10台*每台1噸的垃圾量=10噸的垃圾 →產生10%的灰燼 →產生1頓的灰燼
(假設今年燒的垃圾量與去年相同，但因技術變好，產生殘渣率降低)

看起來似乎對，但是這個例子是在兩年的垃圾量相同的條件之下才成立，
產生灰燼的率不能代表量

譬如今年垃圾量暴增，
共有30台*每台1噸的垃圾量=30噸的垃圾 →產生10%的灰燼 →產生3頓的灰燼
總量一樣會上升，無法達到原本計畫降低灰燼總量的目的。

所以我認為
答案(E)對，至少City S收的垃圾量沒有比去年多，否則無法達到計畫的目的。

不知各位大大對這樣的想法，贊同否?

這一題你對D的解釋論點我同意
不過題目最後一句話,This year city services will separate for recycling enough refuse to reduce the number of truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to half of last year’s number.
似乎可以排除你對D的疑慮,即使如果今年總垃圾量暴增,但可送燃燒的垃圾量已經被限制在去年的一半,換句話說,今年可燃燒的垃圾量已經被題目限制住了...
所以接下來考慮的就只剩下灰燼的產生率...
可燃燒垃圾量*灰燼產生率=灰燼量
題目已經明白點出灰燼量要減半,可燃燒垃圾量也經由recycle方法減半
所以灰燼產生率只要不比去年大,那麼該計畫就可成功
反之,如果灰燼產生率比去年大,那麼該計畫則不一定收效...

[step by step]

贊成liwuu的說法
calvin的分析很精闢，可是可能漏看了題目的最後一句....:)

[Calvin]

to step by step :

i don't quiet understand what u mean by “漏看題目最後一句”

i think my point and explanation are the same as liwuu stated.

[chihhan123]

感謝Calvin 大大、liwuu大大:

是我瞻前顧後失了神...
現在了解了...

勞駕兩位大人來解題.感恩.Orz

[step by step]

to Calvin:
對不起，我看錯文章了，我指的是chihhan123的內容..sorry

[Calvin]

it's ok, don't worry....

let us overcome CR together,

go go