Official Solution:
Over the coming two months, the price of oil in Esteria is projected to increase by enough to approximately double the price paid by Esterian drivers for each gallon of gasoline or diesel fuel. Maria, who lives and works in a large Esterian city, has no car, commutes on electric-powered public transit vehicles, and uses household power derived from hydroelectricity and natural gas. Since she does not use oil-based fuel in any of her everyday activities, Maria does not expect any significant impact on her own cost of living if the Esterian oil price jumps as projected.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens Maria's line of reasoning?
A. Esteria's public-transit systems, including the one on which Maria makes her daily commute, are funded by a fixed-percentage tax charged on all purchases of gasoline or diesel fuel within Esteria.
B. Groceries and other essential items must be transported into Maria's city on small-to-medium-sized diesel-powered trucks.
C. If the price of gasoline climbs as projected, many companies in Maria's city will allow employees who live in the surrounding suburbs to work from home one to two days per week.
D. Newly enacted environmental legislation will increase by one-half the amount that Maria must pay for electrical power.
E. The economists who have predicted the upcoming increase have been correct in nearly all of their recent predictions concerning the Esterian economy.
Even if the projected spike in oil prices hits Esteria, Maria doesn’t think she will be affected because she does not personally consume oil or oil-derived energy. To weaken this argument, we need a cause-effect chain that shows why an increase in the oil price WILL cause some component(s) of Maria’s costs of living to become more expensive.
Let’s go look for that.
(A) This statement does not suggest any increase in costs paid by Maria. In fact, if the fuel tax (which Maria, who has no car, doesn't pay) is a fixed percentage of fuel costs, then Maria's transit system will be flooded with revenue if the oil price jumps, at no added cost whatsoever to Maria. This choice cannot possibly be used to argue that Maria’s costs will go up.
(B) CORRECT: If this statement is true, then the projected price increase will cause the cost of transporting essential items into Maria's city to rise. The stores or their delivery contractors will almost certainly pass at least part of the cost increase on to customers like Maria, who will end up paying more for groceries and other essentials.
(C) Maria does not live in the suburbs, nor do we know whether she works for one of the companies described, so this choice is irrelevant.
(D) This statement suggests that the new legislation will cause Maria's cost of living to increase. The argument, though, is concerned with whether the increase in oil prices will cause Maria's cost of living to rise -- not with whether that cost will rise in general. Since this statement describes an effect that is not due to the rise in oil prices, it is irrelevant.
(E) This statement lends credence to the idea that the projected increase will, in fact, occur. However, the argument is concerned only with what will happen IF the increase does occur, not with the likelihood that it will. This statement thus has no effect on the argument.
Answer: B