Self-study
In most industrial waste products that contain the toxic chemical XTX, the concentration of this chemical is approximately 1,000 parts per million. █ ███████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████ ███ ████ ████ ███ ██████ ████ ███ ████████████ ██ ███ ████ ███ ███████████ ███████ █ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ █████ █████ ████████ ██ █ ████ ███ █████████ ██████ ███ ████ ██ ███ █████████████ ██ ███ ██ █████ ███ █████ ███ ████████ █████ ████████ ████ ██████████████ █████ ████ █████ ████ ██ █████████ ██ █████████████ ███ ███ ███████ █████████ ████ █████████████ ███ ███ ██████ ██████████████ █████ ████████ ██ █████ █████ █████████████ ██ ███ ████ ██ █ ███████████ █████ ███ ████████
Summarize Argument
The question stem asks us to strengthen the antidilution clause in a law regulating the disposal of the toxic chemical XTX. The clause bans companies from diluting waste with a high level of XTX in order to dump it; instead, the companies must incinerate that waste.
Notable Assumptions
To support the antidilution clause, we must assume that diluting waste with an excessive concentration of XTX in order to dump it would cause some kind of harm, which could be avoided by incinerating the waste instead.
25.
Which one of the following, ██ █████ ██████ ████ ████████ ███ ███ █████████ ██ ███ ████████████ █████████ ██ ███ ████
a
If improperly incinerated, █████ ████████ ██████████ █████████ ██████████████ ██ ███ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ███████████ █ ███████ ████ ██ ███ ████████ ████ ██ ████ ████ █████ ██ █████ ██ ███ ██ ██ ███ █████ ██████ ██████
This is irrelevant and does not support the inclusion of the antidilution provision, as this claim only refers to side effects of incineration. We still have no more information about the effects of diluted waste products.
b
If present in ███ ███████████ ██ ██████████ ███████████ ███ ███████ ███ ██ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ████ ████████████ ████
This supports the antidilution clause by showing that XTX dumping is harmful due to the total amount of XTX, not just the concentration. So, if companies dilute their waste but end up dumping the same amount overall, it will do as much harm as if they hadn’t diluted it.
c
When XTX is ███████ ██ ████████ ███ ███████ ██ ██████████ ██████ ████ ████ █ ██████ ██ ██████████ ████ ████████████ ███ ████████████ █████ ██ ████ ██ █████████████ █████
This is irrelevant to the inclusion of the antidilution provision. Without more information (e.g. about how long this breakdown process takes), we can’t say whether this should affect the regulations for XTX disposal in any way.
d
Most owners of █████ ███ █████████ █████ ███ ███████ ██ ██████ ███ ███ ████████ ██ █████ ██████████ ████ ██ ██████████████ █████ ███ █████ ███ ████████
The opinions of hazardous waste dump owners are irrelevant to the law aiming to reduce environmental harm, so this does not strengthen the antidilution clause.
e
To manufacturers, the ████ ██ ████████ ███ █████████ ██ █████ ████████ ██████████ ███ ██ █████████████ ███ ████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ██████████ █████ ████████ ██ █████████████
This does not strengthen the antidilution provision, as the cost of different disposal methods to manufacturers has nothing to do with the safety requirements of the law.