Brochure: Help conserve our cityâ€™s water supply. By converting the landscaping in your yard to a water-conserving landscape, you can greatly reduce your outdoor water use. A water-conserving landscape is natural and attractive, and it also saves you money.
Criticism: For most people with yards, the savings from converting to a water-conserving landscape cannot justify the expense of new landscaping, since typically the conversion would save less than twenty dollars on a homeownerâ€™s yearly water bills.
Which of the following, if true, provides the best basis for a rebuttal of the criticism?
A. Even homeowners whose yards do not have water-conserving landscapes can conserve water by installing water-saving devices in their homes.
B. A conventional landscape generally requires a much greater expenditure on fertilizer and herbicide than does a water-conserving landscape.
C. A significant proportion of the residents of the city live in buildings that do not have yards.
D. It costs no more to put in water-conserving landscaping than it does to put in conventional landscaping.
E. Some homeowners use more water to maintain their yards than they use for all other purposes combined.
A -- so why am I discussing water saving devices. Irrelevant.
B - the savings is not just the yearly water bills, but also money saved from fertilizer and herbicide. Hence makes the change in landscaping a plan to be considered.
C - Irrelevant. Need I say why ?
D - Not quite upto the mark. We are converting a landscape, and not putting up a new one.
E -- irrelevant. the homeowner might have a dog which likes to bath in spraying water, but should I be bothered about it ?