United Lumber will use trees from its forests for two products. The tree trunks will be used for lumber and the branches converted into wood chips to make fiberboard. The cost of this conversion would be the same whether done at the logging site, where the trees are debranched, or at United's factory. However, wood chips occupy less than half the volume of the branches from which they are made.
The information given, if accurate, most strongly supports which of the following?
Converting the branches into wood chips at the logging site would require transporting a fully assembled wood-chipping machine to and from the site.
It would be more economical to debranch the trees at the factory where the fiberboard is manufactured.
The debranching of trees and the conversion of the branches into chips are the only stages in the processing of branches that it would be in United's economic advantage to perform at the logging site.
Transportation costs from the logging site to the factory that are determined by volume of cargo would be lower if the conversion into chips is done at the logging site rather than at the factory.
In the wood-processing industry, branches are used only for the production of wood chips for fiberboard.
只有因
UL要做两个木制产品,把树枝做成wood chips(WC)再做成纤维板;不管是在伐木地做,还是在工厂做,成本一样;
但是,WC的数目少于原材料树枝的一半(也就是说,做WC的过程存在损耗)
求问∴
conclusion题
A、在伐木地做,需要来回搬机器,无关,没提机器
B、砍树枝在工厂做更实惠,无关,反原文(这个选项考虑了钱,有所暗示)
C、加工过程很简单,所以在伐木地做很实惠,无关,反原文(这个选项考虑了钱,有所暗示)
E、在木加工业,树枝只用来做WC,无关
【转自CD-h大神】
D、
重点不是说从logging site运到factory,而是落在后半句,也就是说运输成本的问题。
因为题干说到wood chips occupy less than half the volume of the branches from which they are made,
也就是说branch加工成chip是要耗损的,耗损的量大概是一半多。
所以,运输成本的高低就取决于它是在产地加工,还是在工厂加工,如果在产地加工完再运到工厂,因为已经排除掉了耗损,所以cargo的数量就会少一些,那成本就比较低,就会比较好(用了原文“损耗”的信息得出结论)
1. 我看成了加强题, 2.我没法在两分钟内理解题意。
只有因
UL要做两个木制产品,把树枝做成wood chips(WC)再做成纤维板;不管是在伐木地做,还是在工厂做,成本一样;
但是,WC的数目少于原材料树枝的一半(也就是说,做WC的过程存在损耗)
求问∴
conclusion题
A、在伐木地做,需要来回搬机器,无关,没提机器
B、砍树枝在工厂做更实惠,无关,反原文(这个选项考虑了钱,有所暗示)
C、加工过程很简单,所以在伐木地做很实惠,无关,反原文(这个选项考虑了钱,有所暗示)
E、在木加工业,树枝只用来做WC,无关
【转自CD-h大神】
D、
重点不是说从logging site运到factory,而是落在后半句,也就是说运输成本的问题。
因为题干说到wood chips occupy less than half the volume of the branches from which they are made,
也就是说branch加工成chip是要耗损的,耗损的量大概是一半多。
所以,运输成本的高低就取决于它是在产地加工,还是在工厂加工,如果在产地加工完再运到工厂,因为已经排除掉了耗损,所以cargo的数量就会少一些,那成本就比较低,就会比较好(用了原文“损耗”的信息得出结论)
题目最后一句话,However, wood chips occupy less than half the volume of the branches from which they are made.成品占的空间小。D选项,运输费取决于volume of cargo,那肯定成品占地小,所以在site生产成成品,再运输回去,更省钱。要是没生产成wood chips就运输,那肯定占地大
树干做成木材;树枝变成木屑,做成纤维板; 同样的木头原料,做出来的纤维板会比木材少一半
那么直接在伐木现场制好纤维板,运输费就会少很多
重新做最对了,第一次没读懂
题意理解错误
从branches到chips的conversion cost在logging site(debranched site) 和在factory都是一样的,然而一般wood chips占到的体积只有branches的一半
choice d, 从logging site到factory的运输费用(由货物体积决定)会更低,如果conversion在logging site完成。correct。同等体积的branches( 假设体积V) 如果在logging site转换,体积变成(1/2 V )运输到factory。
However, wood chips occupy less than half the volume of the branches from which they are made.阐明了,做成了木屑后,体积只有树枝的一半。
D选项,假设一:运输费用是由volume决定;假设二:木屑后,volume减少(此为段落最后一句)。
结论:如果就地变成木屑,运输费用会低一些。
段落最后一句补充了D选项的第二个假设,因此能够support D选项的结论。
wood chips occupy less than half the volume of the branches from which they are made。是说木屑的体积只有树枝体积的一半大,所以转化成木屑是有好处的。
United Lumber将使用其森林中的树木作为两种产品。 树干将用于木材,树枝转换成木屑以制造纤维板。 无论是在伐木场所,树木是分支的,还是在美联航的工厂,这种转换的成本都是相同的。 然而,木屑占据制造它们的树枝的体积的一半以下。
1 convert into wood chips cost在伐木地和工厂一样
2 wood chips 占用的地方是branches的一半
d提到了货物的volume,根据2可以得到,在砍伐地将树枝转化成wood chips可以减少volume,因此可以减少运输成本,正确!
branches --> wood chips ----> fiberboard ---- factory
b虽然直接减少了运输成本,但你不知道在b 剪树枝是否远远高过在logging site.
However, wood chips occupy (占)less than half the volume of the branches from which they are made. 就是阐述了一个事实!!!
Transportation costs from the logging site to the factory that are determined by volume of cargo would be lower (if the conversion into chips is done at the logging site) rather than at the factory.