【请教】T-4-Q21

hduszj

T-4-Q21       

The OLEX Petroleum Company has recently determined that it could cut its refining costs by closing its Grenville refinery and consolidating all refining at its Tasberg refinery. Closing the Grenville refinery, however, would mean the immediate loss of about 1,200 jobs in the Grenville area. Eventually the lives of more than 10,000 people would be seriously disrupted. Therefore, OLEX’s decision, announced yesterday, to keep Grenville open shows that at OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits.

 

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument given?

 

A.    The Grenville refinery, although it operates at a higher cost than the Tasberg refinery, has nevertheless been moderately profitable for many years.

B.    Even though OLEX could consolidate all its refining at the Tasberg plant, doing so at the Grenville plant would not be feasible.

C.    The Tasberg refinery is more favorably situated than the Grenville refinery with respect to the major supply routes for raw petroleum.

D.    If the Grenville refinery were ever closed and operations at the Tasberg refinery expanded, job openings at Tasberg would to the extent possible be filled with people formerly employed at Grenville.（合并后，G的员工也并入T，则无员工失业，weaken OLEX公司关于考虑员工问题而放弃合并的说法？？？）

E.     Closure of the Grenville refinery would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.（即便cleanup花费很大，但如果合并后的效益更高，则总体还是获益，因此不能weaken？？？）

请各路大侠指教！！！谢谢！！

xfi883

原题结论是：O公司之所以不关是因为他们关注社会利益，而不是因为关注费用问题。

E的意思是，关掉工厂意味着要清理，清理需要巨额费用，所以不关。这是在关注费用。因此，削弱了结论。

D说，关掉工厂可以让员工去T，而避免下岗的社会问题产生。这说明O公司关注社会问题。而且，题目问的是，为什么不关工厂。因此，答案无关。

[此贴子已经被作者于2009-7-10 1:33:38编辑过]

edmundshi

同意LS的说法～

LZ做题时，不要从选项自己得出结论，然后比较题目结论与自己得出结论的逻辑关系，应直接判断选项和结论的逻辑关系

伊布拉莫维琨

pwss

UP

islandy

想到一个驳斥D的理由：选项说to the extent possible be filled with....只说明了扩张的职位可以达到原工厂职位相当，但“possible”却反映了扩张后雇佣的未必是在G地失业的那批人，因此在G地造成的社会问题还是没法解决。
题外话：毕竟转移人员是需要很大成本的，这种方法不太可行。

gabrielvon

xfi883 发表于 2009-7-10 01:33
原题结论是：O公司之所以不关是因为他们关注社会利益，而不是因为关注费用问题。E的意思是，关掉工厂意味着 ...

关于D选项，扩大G工厂规模所增加的岗位，能让T工厂的人来工作。这一点驳斥了argument里面的论点，原文说的是Closing the Grenville refinery, however, would mean the immediate loss of about 1,200 jobs in the Grenville area.

进而weaken了原文结论。

不知道我的理解的吗？

lalaquta

Mark一下！               

lalaquta

xfi883 发表于 2009-7-10 01:33
原题结论是：O公司之所以不关是因为他们关注社会利益，而不是因为关注费用问题。E的意思是，关掉工厂意味着 ...

D中，工作的转移只是表明一种事实，为什么会体现olex关系员工呢？
我对于D还是很疑惑，我的理解是，因为G的关闭不会对员工造成影响，所以olex选择不关G与社会concern无关，所以不能说olex更关心社会。
不知道是哪个地方想错了，请高手指点！

gabylu2015

备考GMAT是一场孤独的修行，但我们需要结伴而行，推荐加入这个GMAT CR 交流学习群，共同驶向杀鸡的彼岸