Premise 1: The restaurant business wastes more energy than any other industry in the United States.
Premise 2: Nearly 80 percent of the $10 billion spent on energy by the restaurant industry each year is squandered by the use of inefficient equipment.
Premise 3: At the same time, approximately 70 percent of restaurants in the United States are small businesses that are usually too cash poor to invest in energy-efficient technology.


A. The availability of energy-efficient equipment will reduce the energy costs of the restaurant industry by approximately 30 percent.
Passage does not support that energy will be reduced by 30% although squandering will be reduced by energy efficient equipments, by what percentage it is not clear.

B. No industry in the United States spends greater than $10 billion each year on energy.
Premise 1 says this industry is largest squanderer not that it is the largest user.

C. By using energy-efficient technology, a small restaurant will reduce its expenses by a greater percentage than will a large restaurant.
Again no support in the passage.

D. Approximately $2 billion of the amount spent on energy each year by the restaurant industry is not squandered.
Premise 2 says 80% of energy is squandered because of inefficient equipments, however, it does not say that rest 20% is efficiently used. Maybe there are other factors also but they may be small as compared to the main factor sited in the passage.

E. The replacement of inefficient equipment represents the largest potential source of energy savings for the restaurant industry.
Seems Correct. Because 80% of energy wastage is attributed to inefficient equipments.

IMO E)

I think D is more reliable than E.

i had picked D as well, but apparently the OA is E

Although I picked D but carefully examining the question stem I feel E is correct [b]Nearly 80 percent of the $10 billion spent on energy by the restaurant industry each year is squandered by the use of inefficient equipment.[/b]
There is a possibility that some other source may have led to further squandering of energy resources hence E is the best answer choice

i got the question off another forum; i dont recall them posting a source for it though

How can we conclude on the basis of premise that the replacement represents the LARGEST potential source of energy saving? Premise doesn't say anything about this except for giving a percentage, 80%. If E is correct, then we are convieniently assuming that there's nothing which can affect energy saving MORE THAN inefficient equipments.

IMO, on this front, D atleast conforms with the premise (a 80-20 split holds true in this option!).

IMO E.

Agree with szaszka.

E seems good:)
E it is then

I went for D.
_________________

Trying hard to achieve something unachievable now....