LSAT 123 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q2

LR Question 2 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: After replacing his old gas water heater with a new…

QUESTION TYPE: Paradox – Exception

PARADOX: Jimmy has a new, efficient heater, but his gas bills have increased.

ANALYSIS: Note that the stimulus says Jimmy’s gas bill increased. It didn’t say that the rate of gas used by the water heater increased. So there are a few possibilities:

• Other appliances in the home now use more gas.
• Some outside factor has greatly increased the need for hot water.
• The price of gas has gone up. (Even if Jimmy’s gas usage has gone down.)

___________

1. CORRECT. I actually thought this explained it. I read it like C: this must mean other gas usage has gone up. But that doesn’t need to be so. Imagine these before and after gas usage stats:

   • Before: 100 units of gas. 50 by the water heater.
   • After: 60 units of gas, 10 by the water heater.

   In this situation, the heater accounts for a smaller percentage of gas used by the household. But overall gas usage has also gone down. So this is still a confusing situation: why has the gas bill gone up? (A paradox answer must explain in all numerical hypotheticals, not just some)

2. If Jimmy’s uncle takes long hot showers, that would increase hot water usage. (And therefore account for the increase in gas usage to heat that water. More efficient usage is still usage.)
3. An additional gas appliance accounts for the increase in gas bills. The water heater could be using less gas, but other appliances use more.
4. The stimulus didn’t say Jimmy used more gas. It said he paid more for it. This answer explains why.
5. The cold weather is an external factor which caused an increase in usage. It may be the new heater was more efficient, but usage increased enough to offset this.