Innovations in production technology and decreases in the

Option A - INCORRECT.
The cost of unprocessed trees to make new papers has increased, that is why the cost of recycled paper has not lowered the point of price viability despite the innovations technology.

Option B - INCORRECT.
Price viability has not be adequately profitable despite the decreases in the cost of recycling equipment due to the increases in the cost of raw materials required to manufacture such equipment.

Option C- INCORRECT.)
Innovations in production technology have made it much more cost-efficient to produce new paper from recycled paper rather than the traditional way of producing new papers from tress.

Option D - INCORRECT.
The increased cost efficiency of recycled paper has not affect ''price viability'' despite the comparison in price of paper made from the scraps and sawdust left after processing new trees for lumber, rather than directly from the trees themselves.

Option E - CORRECT.
Despite the innovations of technology and cost efficiency of recycled paper into new paper products, it has been unable to lower the ''point of Price Viability''. Meanwhile, most consumers at the point of purchase can differentiate quality and price difference of a recycled paper into new paper from a new paper made from tress. However, the price of planting new saplings to replace cut trees becomes more expensive, forests reserves not previously worth cutting become cost-effective to cut and this lead to the ''point of price viability''.