yea it is correct..sorry i didnt saw that post in which you mentioned the ans

Why Choice B is not correct

Because we are the concern of the taxes not of the consumption.

Now I hope is clear. Ask whether you o have further doubts.

regards

A is the answer

Even if this question is tagged as easy--it is abouncer to me -- I think the answer is B. Obviously I am out of alingment with what RC is correct answer looks like and hence I get only 30-40 answer correct only.

The biggest hurdle I faced while doing this RC was to make sence of the question. Question is asking the BASIS on which the claim is to be true , moreover the question is a IF question hence we have a liberty to extrapolate the basis. therfore my asnwer was B. I did not even understand the some of the options.

what to do?

This question is tagged easy because it is EASY (at least to some extent). The same OG categorized it as easy.

Moreover, I do think you "overthink" what you should do or not do with the question and what it is asking you.

This is a must be true question with IF or not.

I.E what do you infer reading the stimulus ?? what is NOT clearly stated in the stem but that is true. The tip is this: the answer is a restatement of the stimulus or what is said in one or more of its sentences.

Reading carefully the stimulus, you can almost immediately spot that C, D, and E are out. Nothing is mentioned about renewable energy resources.

We do have "a steady reduction in the total yearly consumption of energy from nonrenewable sources", this means people buy less gasoline, for instance, so the conclusion is less revenue for the government.

Hope this helps.

Regards

Conclusion: there was a steady reduction in the total yearly consumption of energy from non-renewable sources.
Option B: steady decline in total amount of energy consumed.
Reasoning on the above: what if consumption of energy from renewable sources increased. Nothing is mentioned related to this. Therefore (B) cannot be definitely stated -> not the apt answer.

Note that implies they did not pay energy tax until recent time.

In the timeline before that years (which we do not know for sure) they didn't pay. and after they started to pay

OR as per stimulus - they pay in the form - probably they paid already and then started to pay in another way.

But the take away here is this: focus on the stimulus BUT not overthink. It is detrimental to your performance.

Regards

We don't know for sure, if the total energy consumption declined, we know that citizens used less non-renewable energy, but they may start installing of renewable energy sources and consumed even more total amount of energy as a result.

However, declining of non-renewable energy consumption guarantees the lesser revenue for tax collectors
So, A is the correct answer

Years ago, consumers in Frieland began paying an energy tax in the form of two Frieland pennies for each unit of energy consumed that came from nonrenewable sources. Following the introduction of this energy tax, there was a steady reduction in the total yearly consumption of energy from nonrenewable sources.

The key point is that the ration Money:Energy =2/1

For every unit of energy consumed you pay TWO pennies

Following the introduction of this energy tax, there was a steady reduction in the total yearly consumption of energy from nonrenewable sources.

The nonrenewable resources declined

The first + the second tells us that we do have less money in our pocket

B which is

B) There was a steady decline in the total amount of energy consumed each year in Frieland.

Is just part of the story.

I hope this helps

Hello from the GRE Prep Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GRE Prep Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.