天山-4-21

xionghuixh

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.
E. Closure of the Grenville refinery would mean compliance, at enormous cost, with
demanding local codes regulating the cleanup of abandoned industrial sites.
Answer:

请问B为什么不好?

bobwangwb

题目有关Grenville plant 的只是是否关闭，与consolidation无关，B说doing
so（consolidation） at the Grenville plant would not be feasible 就无关了。

fiscal

OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire
for higher profits.
这是文章的结论

削弱只是削弱结论，和其他没有关系。

答案里一定要有这样的意思，OLEX这么做其实还是因为钱的关系。

应该是E吧,看到enormous cost就知道是答案了。

B 不能consolidate不意味着要关闭。

华籍美人

原文说为了cut the cost，决定要去关掉G，然而由于G的关闭会引起很多社会问题。

原文就得出结论，G继续开，是考虑到社会问题

E-关掉后，要清理遗留物的cost非常高，所以继续开，说明G继续开还是考虑到成本而不是社会问题

A-profit的多少，与原文的cost cut无关，原文并没有说 G是不赚钱的，只是说成本太高了，基于降成本的考虑,刚开始决定关掉G

B-排除他因，consolidate不行，仍继续开，说明是考虑社会问题；

C-排除他因，没有T方便，仍继续开，说明是考虑社会问题

D-无关，问的是G的情况，与T没啥关系啊．

mymengming

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.

E一直说的就是cost，没有提到social concerns 和higher profits.
而A，则说profits 会有很多，所以这题应该是A吧？？？

mymengming

以下是引用mymengming在2006-7-13 19:04:00的发言：

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.

E一直说的就是cost，没有提到social concerns 和higher profits.
而A，则说profits 会有很多，所以这题应该是A吧？？？

应该是E, A 有几个不好:

1.微利几年,不能代表将来

2.moderate不好,到底是多还是少?

布瓜丫丫

这个应该是E，这是排出他因weaken，说明了公司最终没有采取做法的原因是清理成本太高，

liuyang1984

我做逻辑的基本方法，如果该问题论证结构是前提结论分别为原因结果，则找其他原因证明该结果不成立。原文的结论是 OLEX social concerns sometimes outweigh the desire for higher profits，证明其不成立的方法就是找出其他理由说明OLEX并不是因为关心社会才不进行consolidation的，所以选E

MaccMichAA

...

sigrid920

还是没有明白(B), 文章结论说没有关闭G说明公司关心社会高于关心公司利益,(B)说不关闭G是因为not feasible.不也说明了不是因为关心社会利益吗?