In the past the country of Siduria has relied heavily on imported oil. Siduria recently implemented a program to convert...
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
In the past the country of Siduria has relied heavily on imported oil. Siduria recently implemented a program to convert heating systems from oil to natural gas. Siduria already produces more natural gas each year than it burns, and oil production in Sidurian oil fields is increasing at a steady pace. If these trends in fuel production and usage continue, therefore, Sidurian reliance on foreign sources for fuel should decline soon.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
Passage Analysis:
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| In the past the country of Siduria has relied heavily on imported oil. |
|
| Siduria recently implemented a program to convert heating systems from oil to natural gas. |
|
| Siduria already produces more natural gas each year than it burns, and oil production in Sidurian oil fields is increasing at a steady pace. |
|
| If these trends in fuel production and usage continue, therefore, Siduria reliance on foreign sources for fuel should decline soon. |
|
Argument Flow:
The argument starts by establishing Siduria's historical dependence on imported oil, then presents three key changes: switching to natural gas heating, having excess natural gas production, and increasing domestic oil production. These premises work together to support the conclusion that foreign fuel dependence will decrease.
Main Conclusion:
Siduria's reliance on foreign sources for fuel should decline soon if current trends continue.
Logical Structure:
The argument uses a trend-based prediction structure. It combines multiple positive trends (reduced oil usage through conversion, surplus natural gas production, and increasing oil production) to predict a future outcome (reduced foreign fuel dependence). The logic assumes these trends will continue and work together effectively.
Prethinking:
Question type:
Assumption - We need to find what the author must believe to be true for the conclusion to logically follow
Precision of Claims
The argument makes specific claims about fuel conversion (heating systems from oil to gas), production levels (natural gas surplus, increasing oil production), and timing (decline should happen 'soon')
Strategy
Look for ways the conclusion could fail even if all the stated facts remain true. The conclusion is that foreign fuel reliance will decline soon based on converting heating to natural gas, having natural gas surplus, and increasing domestic oil production. We need to find what gaps exist between these premises and the conclusion
This states that fuel consumption isn't rising faster than fuel production. This is exactly what the argument must assume. Even if Siduria converts to natural gas, has surplus natural gas, and increases oil production, the conclusion about declining foreign fuel reliance would fail if consumption outpaces production growth. The author must believe production can keep up with consumption for the conclusion to work. This is the correct assumption.
This compares the growth rates of natural gas versus oil production domestically. The argument doesn't require natural gas production to grow faster than oil production. As long as both contribute to meeting fuel needs (and consumption doesn't outpace total production), the conclusion could still hold. This isn't required for the argument to work.
This claims no other fuel besides natural gas will replace oil. The argument doesn't depend on natural gas being the only oil replacement. Other fuels could also replace oil and still support the conclusion about reduced foreign fuel dependence. The argument works even if multiple fuel types replace imported oil.
This states that solar energy cannot be used for heating. The argument doesn't require ruling out solar heating. Whether or not solar energy is viable doesn't affect the logic about natural gas conversion and domestic fuel production reducing foreign fuel reliance. This is irrelevant to the argument's core logic.
This claims all new homes will have natural gas heating systems. The argument doesn't require every single new home to use natural gas. The conclusion could work even if only most homes convert, as long as the overall trend reduces foreign fuel dependence. This is too extreme to be a necessary assumption.