扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / Prep2007E1-CR-42
Editorial:
Regulations recently imposed by the government of Risemia call for unprecedented reductions in the amounts of pollutants manufacturers are allowed to discharge into the environment. It will take costly new pollution control equipment requiring expensive maintenance to comply with these regulations. Resultant price increases for Risemian manufactured goods will lead to the loss of some export markets. Clearly, therefore, annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument in the editorial?
The need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge.
The proposed regulations include a schedule of fines for noncompliance that escalate steeply in cases of repeated noncompliance.
Savings from utilizing the chemicals captured by the pollution control equipment will remain far below the cost of maintaining the equipment.
By international standards, the levels of pollutants currently emitted by some of Risemia's manufacturing plants are not considered excessive.
The stockholders of most of Risemia's manufacturing corporations exert substantial pressure on the corporations to comply with environmental laws.
因果
商品价格提高→出口市场份额减少
削弱这个复杂逻辑链条（CQ1）或引入干扰因素（CQ2)
A、排污机器的全球需求emerge（出口的也就多啦），另辟蹊径扩大出口市场需求，引入干扰因素，CORRECT
B、不守规矩就罚款（变相增加成本），变相增强
C、化学排污节约的费用远低于存留排污机器的，其实无关，勉强变相增强
C、按国际标准，现在企业的排污量没有超标，与R国自己的削减政策无关
E、股东为遵守规矩的企业施压，无关
要攻击的是出口问题呀！！！C是无关选项呀，小傻子我真是个
枚举推理
Some export markets loss推出all export markets loss
A给出其他样本，new pollution control equipment market有市场需求
C 方向反了。。
Clearly therefore, annual exports of Risemian manufactured goods will in the future occur at diminished levels.
CR一定要看清楚conclusion是什么！！！！！！！！
因：法规限制污染，制造业产品价格上涨导致出口市场的损失；
果：制造业产品的年出口量将会下降；
攻击方向：（1）攻击前提：无关因，即法规限制、出口市场损失和年出口量无关（这里似乎挺难攻击的）；（2）攻击结论：干扰因素使结论不成立，法规限制排污的高要求，激发企业研发国际领先的排污设备（此即为干扰因），而对于这个设备可能会出现a strong worldwide demand，那么年出口量则不一定会下降，削弱结论。
the passage goes from 【'the loss of some export markets'】to 【'annual exports of ... goods will ... diminish'】
that's a logical leap. in particular, the hidden assumption is that no other export markets will step up to take the place of the ones that will be lost. if we can find an answer choice that contradicts this assumption, we can weaken the argument.
for option C: what is the argument? it's export-related argument.
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
感觉A选项也不是很对的样子
出口说的是总体，因为法规这些设备也会增加利润。。。。额。。。。
我晕 saving比cost少！
因果
The need to comply with the new regulations will stimulate the development within Risemia of new pollution control equipment for which a strong worldwide demand is likely to emerge.
法规刺激R国内新设备的发展，世界范围内对该设备的需求将会出现。
CR：R国制定的环保法规，但这里讲的是世界其他国家也需要这个新设备。R国因为法规强制安装新设备，提升了国内新设备的制造水平，因此可能占领该新设备的世界市场。
pollution equipment属于manufactured good...
出口包含很多种，原来这一种降低出口不代表别的出口也降低
P:R国新法规导致加装昂贵的设备来减少排放，因此产生的成本会转移到产品上，因而伤害这些产品的出口市场->C:R国生产的产品在未来的出口将处于一个降低的水平
choice a, 新法规会刺激R国出现减排设备，这种设备的需求有可能在海外出现。 correct, 法规颁布之后R国所有出口产品= 法规颁布之后减少的出口产品+ 法规颁布之后新增的出口减排设备
A选项确实是瘸子里挑将军了
new pollution control equipment 属于 manufactured goods
太烧脑
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
脑子秀逗了，一看到saving和cost没仔细看就选了，saving＜cost，利润还是减少；saving＞cost，利润才能增加。
MARK.
(C) Savings from utilizing the chemicals captured by the pollution control equipment will remain far below the cost of maintaining the equipment.
仔细读题！！句子说的是savings < cost，即cost更多，如果该条件成立，则会加强prizes增长的条件，从而strengthen原结论。
这道题我的错误在于大于小于搞反了
C选项：使用污染控制设备所捕获的化学物质的节省将远远低于维持设备的成本。
只能说明使用这个设备会导致产品的最终价格变高，和题目的逻辑链“产品价格与出口”没有关系。