PT108.S3.Q5 > Question

SECTION 1 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8

PASSAGE 2

Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16

PASSAGE 3

Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21

PASSAGE 4

Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 2 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7

PASSAGE 2

Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15

PASSAGE 3

Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20

PASSAGE 4

Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

The author concludes that, over the long run, oxygen-removing refrigerators will be far less expensive than current models. He arrives at this conclusion by pointing out that food inside of oxygen-removing refrigerators won’t need to be kept as cold and energy costs will be reduced.

The author argues that since oxygen-removing refrigerators won’t need to be kept as cold as current refrigerator models, oxygen-removing refrigerators will be far cheaper than current models in the long term. However, the author’s reasoning is vulnerable to criticism because it doesn’t consider the possibility that other expenses associated with oxygen-removing refrigerators will cause them to not be significantly less expensive than current models in the long term.

This is a key possibility that the argument ignores. If these expenses outweigh the money saved from keeping the food in the oxygen-removing refrigerators at a warmer temperature, the oxygen-removing models may not be significantly cheaper than current models in the long term.

Consumer discomfort with the new refrigerators is irrelevant. The argument is only concerned with how much cheaper the new refrigerators could potentially be than current models.

The technology doesn’t need to be explained. The author is just making the case that refrigerators fitted with this technology will be cheaper, in the long run, than current refrigerator models.

It’s not clear that the author doesn’t take this into account, but even if he doesn’t, the effectiveness of current refrigerator technology in preventing food spoilage has no bearing on whether oxygen-removing models will be cheaper in the long term.

It’s not clear that the author doesn’t take this into account, but even if he doesn’t, the inconvenience caused by food spoilage in current refrigerators has no bearing on whether oxygen-removing models will be cheaper in the long term.

PrepTest 108 - Section 3 - Question 5

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action