扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / Prep2007E1-CR-23
From 1978 to 1988, beverage containers accounted for a steadily decreasing percentage of the total weight of household garbage in the United States. The increasingly widespread practice of recycling aluminum and glass was responsible for most of this decline. However, although aluminum recycling was more widely practiced in this period than glass recycling, it was found that the weight of glass bottles in household garbage declined by a greater percentage than the weight of aluminum cans.
Which of the following, if true of the United States in the period 1978 to 1988, most helps to account for the finding?
Glass bottles are significantly heavier than aluminum cans of comparable size.
Recycled aluminum cans were almost all beverage containers, but a significant fraction of the recycled glass bottles had contained products other than beverages.
Manufacturers replaced many glass bottles, but few aluminum cans, with plastic containers.
The total weight of glass bottles purchased by households increased at a slightly faster rate than the total weight of aluminum cans.
In many areas, glass bottles had to be sorted by color of the glass before being recycled, whereas aluminum cans required no sorting.
前提：铝罐和玻璃瓶的回收利用导致家用垃圾中他们的重量减少；铝罐回收利用更普遍比起玻璃瓶；
结论：但是玻璃瓶在家用垃圾中所占的比重（和以前玻璃瓶比重占比比）比铝罐下降的更快
解释题为啥？
a.玻璃和铝罐的重量比，无关比较，原题结论是玻璃回收后和玻璃回收前的比重比.
b.扩大讨论范围，排除（原文只探讨作为饮料容器的情况下）
c.生产商会用塑料瓶取代玻璃瓶，而不取代铝罐。（给出了玻璃瓶减少的另一个途径，是塑料瓶没有的），正确
d.家庭购买的玻璃瓶的总重量增长更快比铝罐。无关比较。（购买多少玻璃都会回收利用，没有对结论产生任何意义）
e.玻璃回收前先分类，无关。（因为最后都回收，对结论没作用）
by a greater percentage 减少了百分比，也就是占有率
又来看这道题，A的话比较的也是相同大小的瓶子，事实上文中也没有提到，不够严谨
涉及总体总量时，不仅要考虑单体的重量，也要考虑总体的数量。否则不能单独从单体的总量或总体的数量从发进行比较。
凡是此类由多因素决定最终结果的题目，都得将所有因素考虑进去。
1978-1988，美国的生活垃圾中，饮料瓶所占的重量比重下降了。因为铝和玻璃都被回收了。但是，虽然铝比玻璃回收的更多，但在生活垃圾中玻璃瓶子所占的重量比重下降的比铝多。问哪项可以解释。
此题只考虑回收的量铝更多，但如果玻璃瓶使用得就少的话，一样可以解释题目中描述的现象。即C选项。A选项虽然glass bottle比铝盒重，但在不知glass bottle和铝盒的总的回收量的情形下无法解释现象。D选项犯和A选项一样的错误。E选项是无关选项。B选项是无关选项。
如果D对那么 a bottles in household garbage declined by a greater percentage than the weight of g cans
循环利用不代表在垃圾里的重量比率减少，只有循环的方式是被其他东西替代了，重量才会减少，这就是玻璃重量比下降的方式
生产商把很多玻璃瓶换成了塑料瓶，而铝罐没怎么换； 虽然铝回收比玻璃多，但生产阶段玻璃瓶就少了很多，变成了塑料瓶，于是变成垃圾的玻璃瓶就少了，从而解释了原文矛盾，正确
时态也能说明问题。。。A这么说就是个事实了
错选E，分不分类与回收的重量显然无关。
题眼：玻璃瓶重量比铝罐下降的多，原因—玻璃瓶单个重只能是量少了才有这样的结果
1978-1988，美国的生活垃圾中，饮料瓶所占的重量比重下降了。铝和玻璃回收对这种下降起了作用。但是，虽然铝比玻璃更多的回收，在生活垃圾中玻璃瓶子所占的重量比重下降的比铝多
解释题 分析题目，出现矛盾，铝比玻璃回收多，但玻璃占重量下降比重还更大，需解决矛盾
(A)玻璃瓶同等大小比铝罐重很多；但铝回收更多，无关比较，排
(B)回收的铝罐几乎都是饮料罐，而回收的玻璃瓶很大部分不是饮料瓶；瓶子或罐子是否装饮料显然无关，排
(C)生产商把很多玻璃瓶换成了塑料瓶，而铝罐没怎么换； 虽然铝回收比玻璃多，但生产阶段玻璃瓶就少了很多，变成了塑料瓶，于是变成垃圾的玻璃瓶就少了，从而解释了原文矛盾，正确
(D) 被买的玻璃瓶总重量比铝罐总重量增长快一点；重量增长快，并不能说明重量更多，排
(E) 很多地方，玻璃瓶在回收前按颜色分类；铝罐不分类；分不分类与回收的重量显然无关，排。
the weight of glass bottles in household garbage declined by a greater percentage than the weight of aluminum cans.
A选项错在，Glass bottles are significantly heavier than aluminum cans of comparable size.一直以来是一个事实，以前是这样，现在还是这样，不能用来解释变化
Consequently the amount disposed of would be:
Glass bottles : 50- 25 = 25 (fall of 75 % from 100 units)
Aluminium Can : 90- 50 = 40 (fall of 60 % from 100 units)
Hence the conclusion: glass bottles in household garbage declined by a greater percentage than aluminum cans.
So it supports the findings.
C: 50 units of glass bottles on daily basis (more (50)glass bottles were replaced with plastic)
and 90 units of Aluminium cans on daily basis.(less (10) glass bottles were replaced with plastic)
Since more aluminum cans are recycled than are glass bottles...
so let assume that 50 units of aluminium are recycled and 25 units of glass bottles are recycled on daily basis.
p;回收alumium比glass更为广泛，c;废弃在垃圾里的alumium比glass的重量应该更少 因果推理 削弱
a.是不是百分比其实去除了相对质量的影响呢？所以这个无关？
a为什么不对啊
我觉得是 相比之下A更好 A中 虽然glass比al重 但是有可能由于al回收的太多，减少的重量比glass减少的更大 但是C中就完全说明了 many glass 都被替换了，基本没有al被换掉，所以glass的占比更大的下降了
嗯嗯，好像懂了
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论