Q1

[chocolatebunny]

I was down to A and D for this one but picked D over A. Is D wrong because researchers are not seeking to develop equipment but rather looking to redesign the two pumps?

[noah]

It's a surprisingly tough passage.

Let's work wrong-to-right here:

(A) defer

(B) is out of scope (with a sneaky detail creep). There's no discussion of installing processing facilities underwater.

(C) is similar to (B) - the passage is about improving pumps for the sake of reducing the need to have those dangerous platforms, not about improving processing facilities. If anything, it's about doing away with some processing facilities.

(D) is related to (C) in that we're not trying to eliminate processing facilities onshore, we're trying to eliminate them offshore!

(E) is clearly out of scope and perhaps even contradicted. One problem with one of the pumps is that it does separate the gunk.

So, we're left with (A). It's tricky because you need to keep in mind the issue of worker safety; but that was the reason for all this research (lines 8-12).

[mattglandry]

the thing about "A" and "B" is we were never ever ever given any indication that the Oil companies were doing anything...only unassigned researchers. I had quickly eliminated both for that reason. Also later we were told that they focused mainly on reducing cost...so I really really don't get why its "A".

After I had eliminated "A" and "B" I chose "C"

I chose "C" because if they are "attempting to diminish the need of human labor"I took that as enhance efficiency. also the processing facilities are the platforms...thats what I got was that they are having to process at platforms since they can't pump if if it isn't processed...I get what Noah is saying that is actually aiming at getting rid of processing facilities...but since I had eliminated the correct answer I ended up with this one. ouch

This was a really bad passage for me because I felt like I had a really good understanding but this question and question 7 messed me up big time

[AnnaC659]

It's a surprisingly tough passage.

Let's work wrong-to-right here:

(A) defer

(B) is out of scope (with a sneaky detail creep). There's no discussion of installing processing facilities underwater.

(C) is similar to (B) - the passage is about improving pumps for the sake of reducing the need to have those dangerous platforms, not about improving processing facilities. If anything, it's about doing away with some processing facilities.

(D) is related to (C) in that we're not trying to eliminate processing facilities onshore, we're trying to eliminate them offshore!

(E) is clearly out of scope and perhaps even contradicted. One problem with one of the pumps is that it does separate the gunk.

So, we're left with (A). It's tricky because you need to keep in mind the issue of worker safety; but that was the reason for all this research (lines 8-12).

I understand that the main idea is about research being done to increase workers' safety. But I don't understand how "Oil companies are experimenting with technologies" in (A) is correct. I couldn't infer from anywhere that it was the "Oil Companies" doing anything at all but rather "researchers," who I considered as completely separate entities.

Could you explain on this please?

[ohthatpatrick]

"Researchers" do not have to be a separate entity.

Many businesses and industries do their own research. For example, one of the reasons that pharmaceutical companies say that their high drug prices are justified is that these companies have to spend so much money on R&D (research and development) in order to design a new drug.

The research being conducted in this passage sounds like it's being done for commercial purposes, not for scientific purposes (I think you're reading "researchers" to mean "scientists seeking only better knowledge of the world").

Before Exxon can drill somewhere, its geologic researchers have to study the surface and subsurface features. Its chemistry/physics researchers have to think about the properties and challenges of transporting this oil to wherever they want it to go. Its mechanical engineers have to design and build the pipes. Its market researchers have to investigate Exxon's market position. etc. etc.

So there is definitely a conversational drift from "oil companies" to "researchers", but we're allowed to interpret the passage in the most conservative sense: researchers working to solve problems for these oil companies are working FOR these oil companies.