solution:
The argument concludes that United Energy may be acting in a manner consistent with reaching its financial goals. However, this conclusion must be distinguished from the assertion of the environmentalists described in the question - that the actions taken by United Energy indicate that the company is putting environmental concerns ahead of financial returns. The answer choices may consider either the author's conclusion (which is considered the overall conclusion) or the conclusion asserted by the environmentalists (which is considered the opposing opinion).

This is an Analyze the Argument Structure question. The best approach is to consider each boldface in turn.

(A) The first boldface does not support the author's conclusion that United Energy may be acting in a manner consistent with its financial goals; the second does not call the conclusion into question as much as state its opposite.

(B) The first boldface does not state the conclusion of the argument; the second boldface does not support the conclusion of the main argument, which is that United Energy may be acting in a manner consistent with its financial goals.

(C) CORRECT. The first boldface supports the environmentalists’ conclusion that United Energy is acting in a manner that places environmental impact ahead of financial returns. The second boldface states this conclusion.

(D) The first boldface is a relationship that does support the environmentalists' conclusion; however, the second states this conclusion, and does not undermine it.

(E) The first boldface does not support the author's conclusion, which is that United Energy may be acting in its financial interest; the second boldface also does not support this conclusion.

I am confused can anyone how to solve bold face cr questions
Please suggest me a correct strategy ... any link from where I can read more
can bold face questions have 2 conclusions: