|
中国問題（？）のCRで１つ悩んでいます。
どなたか、考え方を教えてください
A new technique for extracting residues of oil from existing oil wells by using lignins, a by-product of papermaking, is profitable provided that oil prices are over 20 dollars a barrel. Since oil prices are rising, investors looking for companies with prospects for rapid growth in profits would be wise to invest in paper manufacturers, whose currently almost worthless by-product will soon be a profit-boosting commodity.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
A.A small quantity of lignins are currently sold by paper manufacturers to Chemical companies, but most of the lignins produced are burnt as waste.
B.The 20-dollar-a-barrel oil price as a threshold of profitability for using lignins allows for the increased cost of refining crude oil that has been extracted using lignins.
C.Only one-half to two-thirds of the total oil in a well can be extracted using conventional techniques of pumping and flooding with water.
D.Petroleum-based substances that can be used as a substitute for lignins in extracting oil are costly and are made from oil, and these substances therefore increase in price as oil increases in price.
E.The quantity of lignins produced annually in the manufacture of paper is several times larger than the amount that is likely to be useful in the oil industry.
A,Cはどちらかというと、strengthenするので×。Dは関係なし。Eは「ligninsは余るものの、紙業界の収益は向上する」のでWEAKENはしない。
で、Bを読むと「ligninsを使うかどうかの収益臨界点としての１バレル20ドルの価格は、lignins を使って抽出された原油にたいする精製のコスト増を許容する。」
→つまり全工程としてはコスト増となる。
とかんがえ、これを選択しました。
が、答えはEでした。ここまでの解釈で大きな見落としをやっいてそうな気もします。どなたか私のミスの指摘と正しい解釈を説明いただきたくよろしくお願いします
|
