LSAT 138 – Section 3 – Question 14

LSAT 138 - Section 3 - Question 14

December 2012

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:15

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT138 S3 Q14
+LR
Resolve reconcile or explain +RRE
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Net Effect +NetEff
A
3%
155
B
89%
165
C
4%
156
D
2%
154
E
2%
159
132
142
152
 +Medium 147.528 +SubsectionMedium

Mayor: Our city faces a difficult environmental problem caused by the enormous amount of garbage that we must dispose of. Although new recycling projects could greatly reduce this amount, these projects would actually be counterproductive to the goal of minimizing the overall amount of environmental damage.

"Surprising" Phenomenon

Why would new recycling projects be counterprodutive to the goal of minimizing environmental damage, even though the high amount of garbage produced by the city causes environmental damage and the recycling projects would reduce the amount of garbage?

Objective

The correct answer will suggest some way that new recycling projects could lead to more overall environmental damage than forgoing those recycling projects. Perhaps, for example, new recycling projects end up harming the environment in other ways, even if they help by reducing the amount of garbage.

A
The vehicles that pick up materials for recycling create less pollution than would be caused by incinerating those materials.

We don’t know whether incineration is part of the new recycling projects. But even if it were, (A) suggests incineration could produce less environmental damage than the current recycling method. So, we’d still expect new recycling projects to produce less overall damage.

B
The great costs of new recycling projects would prevent other pollution-reducing projects from being undertaken.

Other pollution-reducing projects might reduce damage even more than the new recycling projects. If the new recycling projects prevent us from doing those other projects, this could be why the new recycling projects would be counterproductive.

C
The mayor’s city has nearly exhausted its landfill space and therefore must incinerate much of its garbage.

Is incineration a new recycling project? If it isn’t, it has no clear impact. If it is, then the lack of landfill space suggests incineration could be good for the environment. (C) doesn’t tell us something potentially negative about the new recycling projects.

D
More recycling would give industries in the mayor’s city a greater incentive to use recycled materials in their manufacturing processes.

If anything, this answer suggests another benefit of new recycling projects. That doesn’t help explain why new recyling projects could lead to more overall environmental damage.

E
People who recycle feel less justified in consuming more than they need than do people who do not recycle.

If anything, this suggests another benefit of new recycling projects. If we can get people to recycle, they might not use as many resources, which might be good for the environment. This doesn’t help explain why new recycling projects could lead to more environmental damage.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 138 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply