Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
75% (02:57) correct
25% (01:21) wrong based on 6 sessions
Brochure: Help conserve our city'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 homeowner'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.
Re: CR - water supply [#permalink]
31 Jul 2010, 01:03
noboru, the question asks about the "rebuttal of the criticism".. Hence, I think the ans should tell the critics apart from the 20$ advantage, the maintenance of conventional one are costlier than the water-conserving one..