Question

High Towers, a company that occupies several office buildings, is considering
installing new energy-efficient lightbulbs in its buildings. The new bulbs require
less than half the electricity consumed by the conventional bulbs currently used
to produce the same amount of light. The new bulbs also last considerably longer.
It follows that by replacing old bulbs as they burn out with the new kind of bulb,
High Towers would significantly reduce its overall lighting costs. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument given?

• A. \( \text{New bulbs may become as cheap as conventional ones.} \)
• B. \( \text{Utility offers discounts to large customers.} \)
• C. \( \text{Company added a small office building.} \)
• D. \( \text{Employees are encouraged to turn off lights.} \)
• E. \( \text{New bulb maker has exclusive patent rights.} \)

Hint:

Look for evidence reducing total cost.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

Step 1: Argument: New bulbs use less electricity, last longer, reducing costs.
Step 2: Needs to address cost of new bulbs.
Step 3: (A) suggests lower purchase cost, strengthening cost reduction.
Step 4: Others (B, C, D, E) don’t directly impact bulb cost savings.