【OG24-744题】Increased use of incineration is sometimes advocated as a safe way to dispose of chemical waste. But opponents of incineration point to the 40 incidents involving unexpected releases of dangerous chemical agents that were reported just last year at two existing incinerators commissioned to destroy a quantity of chemical waste material. Since designs for proposed new incinerators include no additional means of preventing such releases, leaks will only become more prevalent if use of incineration increases.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?_mofa留学圈mofaGRE在线题库系统_GRE在线搜题_GRE题库解析_GRE真题机经_GRE课程_GRE培训机构

Help

右上角的时钟图标会对每道题和所有题计时
右上角的文件夹点击可以打开和关闭当前题号
点击右上角的星星图标，所有被收藏的题目均可在“我的”-“收藏”中找到
点击右下角 Next进入下一题。注意：如果你没有做当前题目，你将不可以进入下一题
点击左下角的 Quit或 End Exam 即可退出练习

End Section Review

yes

End Exam

yes

Answer Edit Confirmation

你想更改这个问题的答案吗?

Yes,换答案

No，保留原始答案并回到问题上

最新题目

题目内容

纠错

Increased use of incineration is sometimes advocated as a safe way to dispose of chemical waste. But opponents of incineration point to the 40 incidents involving unexpected releases of dangerous chemical agents that were reported just last year at two existing incinerators commissioned to destroy a quantity of chemical waste material. Since designs for proposed new incinerators include no additional means of preventing such releases, leaks will only become more prevalent if use of incineration increases.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

At the two incinerators at which leaks were reported, staff had had only cursory training on the proper procedures for incinerating chemical waste. Other means of disposing of chemical waste, such as chemical neutralization processes, have not been proven safer than incineration. The capacity of existing incinerators is sufficient to allow for increased incineration of chemical waste without any need for new incinerators. The frequency of reports of unexpected releases of chemical agents at newly built incinerators is about the same as the frequency at older incinerators. In only three of the reported incidents of unexpected chemical leaks did the releases extend outside the property on which the incinerators were located.

正确答案： A

参考解析

提交我的解析

题干翻译
焚烧（incineration）指出：去年在两个现有焚烧炉中报告了40起涉及危险化学试剂意外释放的事件。由于拟建新焚烧炉的设计中没有额外防止此类释放的手段，若焚烧使用增加，泄漏将更普遍。 逻辑链
现有炉泄漏多，新炉无防漏改进→焚烧增加泄漏更普遍 问题类型
削弱题 推理过程
要削弱上述论证，需找到其他原因说明即使新炉设计没改进且焚烧增加，泄漏也不一定更普遍。 选项分析
A选项：报告有泄漏的两个焚烧炉中，工作人员对焚烧化学废物的正确程序只有粗略培训。这表明可能是人员培训问题导致泄漏，而非焚烧炉设计本身，所以即使新炉设计不变，若人员培训改善，泄漏不一定更普遍，削弱了论点，当选。 B选项：其他处理化学废物的方式未被证明比焚烧更安全，与焚烧泄漏是否会更普遍无关，话题不一致，排除。 C选项：现有焚烧炉的容量足够，不需要新焚烧炉，讨论的是是否需要新炉，而非泄漏问题，话题不一致，排除。 D选项：新建焚烧炉和旧焚烧炉意外释放化学试剂的报告频率相同，只是在比较频率，未涉及泄漏是否会更普遍的问题，无法削弱，排除。 E选项：在报告的意外化学泄漏事件中只有三起泄漏扩散到焚烧炉所在场地之外，说的是泄漏扩散范围，与泄漏是否更普遍无关，排除。

题目讨论 (如果对题目有任何的疑惑，欢迎在这里提出来，大家会帮你解答的哦~)

还没有人评论,赶快抢个沙发~

做题笔记

参考解析

题目讨论 (如果对题目有任何的疑惑，欢迎在这里提出来，大家会帮你解答的哦~)

请选择错误类型：

请描述一下这个错误：