Critics of the new Clean Energy Bill argue that it will lead to higher energy costs due to the implementation of expensive renewable energy technologies. Since the bill's passage, we have replaced a number of conventional power plants with renewable energy projects and the average cost of electricity from these renewable sources has consistently been lower than the national average each year, which demonstrates that the bill has effectively contributed to reducing overall electricity costs. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the policy speech? (A) The cost of setting up renewable energy projects has decreased globally due to technological advancements over the last five years. (B) Electricity costs were rising at a rate above the national average in the years immediately before the Clean Energy Bill was implemented. (C) Some of the renewable energy projects started under the Clean Energy Bill have been discontinued due to technological inefficiencies. (D) The average cost of electricity generated from conventional (non-renewable) sources that were phased out since the bill's passage has been consistently higher than the national average during the same period. (E) The price of electricity in areas outside the influence of the Clean Energy Bill has risen due to increased costs of non-renewable energy resources.

Last visit was: 21 Sep 2026, 06:11

It is currently 21 Sep 2026, 06:11

Toolkit

Critical Reasoning (CR)

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Go to My Error Log Learn more

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Sep 21
Live Online Bootcamp Class with Top GMAT Expert Chris Peckover
07:00 PM EDT
-
10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included!

Back to Forum

Create Topic

GMAT Club Olympics 2024 (Day 6): Environmental Policy Speech: Critics

1 2 3 4 5 6

KarishmaB

Tutor

Joined: 16 Oct 2010

Last visit: 19 Sep 2026

Posts: 16,653

Own Kudos:

81,447

Given Kudos: 492

Location: Pune, India

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 16,653

Kudos: 81,447

05 Jul 2026, 04:50

Kudos

Bookmarks

gullyboy09

Hi KarishmaB, I was talking about at different time. Before the implementation and after the implementation.

Before the implementation if NA was 100 and cost of electricity from Non-R source is 150, and post implementation if NA is 1000, and if cost from Ren. source is 500! That's what I was comparing.

Now coming back to the option, I didn't get what it exactly mean as it talks about one who has phased out already and compare their cost to NA. But they do not even exist anymore, then to say "..has been consistently higher" makes less sense.

Maybe if you can help me with what this option means in literal sense, as use of "has been" is confusing for those who are already phased out.

Yes, but think this - after adding renewable sources and removing 150s, how can the average go from 100 to 1000? These are averages of different years but these are averages of the same thing - average cost of electricity. From one year to the next (before implementation to after implementation) how could the average go from 100 to 1000 even though you removed the expensive units of last year? To increase the average to 1000, you will need to have the added renewable units at greater than 1000.
Think practically - the average last year was 100. Some units came at 50 and some at 150.
This year, I remove some of the 150 units, the average this year goes below 100. Now if I add new units of renewable energy which are below the new average, it means the new units at certainly below 100.

We are talking about different timelines but they are related. We are not talking about independent quantities in the two years.