Millions of homes are now using low-energy lighting, but millions more

Question

Millions of homes are now using low-energy lighting, but millions more have still to make the switch, a fact that the government and the home lighting industry are eager to change. Although low-wattage bulbs cost more per bulb than normal bulbs, their advantages to the homeowner are enormous, and therefore everyone should use low-wattage bulbs.

Information about which one of the following would be LEAST useful in evaluating the argument?

(A) the actual cost of burning low-wattage bulbs compared to that of burning normal bulbs
(B) the profits the home lighting industry expects to make from sales of low-wattage bulbs
(C) the specific cost of a low-wattage bulb compared with that of a normal bulb
(D) the opinion of current users of low-wattage bulbs as to their effectiveness
(E) the average life of a low-wattage bulb compared with that of a normal bulb

redskull1 · Answer

But C is mentioned in the passage.Why would the specific costs be relevant..?

Posted from my mobile device

patto · Answer

I think that if the low wattage bulb is way too expensive, then it won't be convenient to homeowners to buy it.

diljeetsingh · Answer

please explainoption option a??

rocky620 · Answer

I also think that Option C is least relevant.

Option B, mentions profits of the companies. More profits from Low wattage bulbs will lead to more vouching for them and vice versa so i think it is definitely reliable.

Awaiting experts opinion on this.

Aks4444MBA · Answer

Conclusion is - therefore everyone should use low-wattage bulbs.
B . lighting industry Profits will not be impacted to evaluating the argument
C. Specific cost can lead to change in actual cost hence if specific cost increase low-energy lighting bulb cost increase and viceversa

unraveled · Answer

Millions of homes are now using low-energy lighting, but millions more have still to make the switch, a fact that the government and the home lighting industry are eager to change. Although low-wattage bulbs cost more per bulb than normal bulbs, their advantages to the homeowner are enormous, and therefore everyone should use low-wattage bulbs.

Information about which one of the following would be LEAST useful in evaluating the argument?

(A) the  actual cost of burning low-wattage bulbs  compared to that of burning normal bulbs
(B) the profits the home lighting industry expects to make from sales of low-wattage bulbs
(C) the  specific cost of a low-wattage bulb  compared with that of a normal bulb
(D) the  opinion of current users of low-wattage bulbs as to their effectiveness 
(E) the  average life of a low-wattage bulb  compared with that of a normal bulb.

For homeowners to shift to low-wattage bulbs profits of home lighting industry makes least sense. 
Other choices does have some or the other impact.

Answer B.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Millions of homes are now using low-energy lighting, but millions more

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Millions of homes are now using low-energy lighting, but millions more

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards