Q2 - After replacing his old gas

[dan]

2. (A)
Question Type: Explain a Result
If Jimmy got a new, highly efficient water heater, how could his gas bills go up? We’d expect the bills to go down. We can try to anticipate some possible explanations. Most likely, Jimmy’s gas usage increased after he bought the new water heater. This is a tricky EXCEPT question. Four of the answer choices will help to explain the unexpected result while one will not. In fact, the answer we want to choose will either be irrelevant to the situation at hand or it will intensify the unexpected result. Answer (A) is the only answer that does NOT offer an explanation. The relative percentage doesn’t give us any information, as percentage figures don’t tell us anything about the actual amount of gas used.

(B) helps to explain the result. If the size of the household doubled, then gas usage would probably double, which would explain the higher bills.
(C) helps to explain the result. A new appliance that uses gas would explain the higher gas bills. (D) also helps to explain the higher bills. Higher rates mean higher bills.
(E) contributes to an explanation as well. Increased usage would mean higher bills.


#officialexplanation

[coco.wu1993]

I don't understand why A is the right answer. I think A can explain that the increase in gas bills does not result from the water heater. For example, before the installation, Jimmy's gas bills were $20, and the old water heater used 20% of it, which is $4. After the installation, his bills are $40, and the new water heater used 5% of it, which is $2. This is consistent with the stimulus.

[YihanX379]

I don't understand why A is the right answer. I think A can explain that the increase in gas bills does not result from the water heater. For example, before the installation, Jimmy's gas bills were $20, and the old water heater used 20% of it, which is $4. After the installation, his bills are $40, and the new water heater used 5% of it, which is $2. This is consistent with the stimulus.

I have the same question. Is there anyone can help?

[andrewgong01]

I don't understand why A is the right answer. I think A can explain that the increase in gas bills does not result from the water heater. For example, before the installation, Jimmy's gas bills were $20, and the old water heater used 20% of it, which is $4. After the installation, his bills are $40, and the new water heater used 5% of it, which is $2. This is consistent with the stimulus.

I have the same question. Is there anyone can help?

I think the reason for the confusion you have is around the question task. The goal of the paradox explain a result question is for an answer choice to explain the result.

This means, in turn, that it is not good enough to be consistent with the result (i.e. not contradict it) but it needs to give us explanatory power. From the example you quoted above ------the example has only shown that the answer choice does not contradict with the stimulus. However, that is not good enough. Notice how to derive the explanation you quoted the original author had to first assume the gas price increased and then told a story from there on how Answer A could be consistent and not contradict the result.

Instead, the task is to see how "A" can explain the rise in cost and NOT how can we make A consistent with the conclusion/paradox. In other words, the approach should have been How does A explain/cause the rise in cost and NOT 'Given that our bill increased, how can we force some logic into A to make A consistent with a rise in our bill'. That is also the difference between A and the other choices where the other choices are explaining how bills could have increased while the justification you quoted for A is saying how A is possible.

Also, when I first did the problem I never even thought of the example you quoted because the other choices were more obvious eliminations.