sorry, here is the correct question, too many questions after my test

I guess I view it as "show promise" is not as strong as the potential for the only supply of Uranium to come from seawater, i which case the demand/price will definitely shoot up?!?

argh, really messing this up. The correct answer is A!

I will go with B

The OA is A....

Could someone explain why choice A is better than the other choice?
I mean, for instance why A is better than B since the second concern the cost as a key factor in order to choose one extraction technique instead of another ... ?

Thanks in advance ...

A is a better choice, because if the uranium on land is depleting, then there is no other option than to invest in extracting uranium from sea water. Basically, we must substitue yes and no for each answer choice and the choice that affects the conclusion is the right choice.

The yes/no thing is basically the extreme test - answer each question with a yes / no and see how the answer effects the conclusion

Here its between A and C

A) If Uranium in land is depleted then we HAVE to extract from water - so conclusion shall fall

If Uranium in land is not being depleted - then conclusion stands fine.

C) If the cost of extracting Uranium becomes less than it what it costs currently - note : there could be in fact a $1 reduction ( and yet not violate the given condition) - however, a $1 reduction might not qualify uranium extraction from sea water. Hence, we cant conclusively prove anything from this.

Hence A

CR Gurus -> do let me know if my reasoning is flawed.