|
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.
E. Closure of the Grenville refinery would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.
答案是E 可是D怎么错了 原文说减少cost而去关闭G，而关闭G会带来社会问题，结论是考虑到社会问题要继续开G。D说可以关闭G因为T会解决关闭G带来的失业问题，不也是削弱了结论么？？
还是其他别的什么的 请大侠共同探讨
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2010-7-18 21:47:03
收藏
收藏
楼主
