Critical Reasoning

Photovoltaic power plants produce electricity from sunlight. As a result of astonishing recent technological advances, the cost of producing electric power at photovoltaic power plants, allowing for both construction and operating costs, is one-tenth of what it was 20 years ago, whereas the corresponding cost for traditional plants, which burn fossil fuels, has increased. Thus, photovoltaic power plants offer a less expensive approach to meeting demand for electricity than do traditional power plants.
The conclusion of the argument is properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?
(A) The cost of producing electric power at traditional plants has increased over the past 20 years.
(B) Twenty years ago, traditional power plants were producing 10 times more electric power than were photovoltaic plants.
(C) None of the recent technological advances in producing electric power at photovoltaic plants can be applied to producing power at traditional plants.
(D) Twenty years ago, the cost of producing electric power at photovoltaic plants was less than 20 times the cost of producing power at traditional plants.
(E) The cost of producing electric power at photovoltaic plants is expected to decrease further, while the cost of producing power at traditional plants is not expected to decrease.

The OA is diffirent that what i chose, C. i thought that C is the right option because the question asks what is assumed, and then clearly assumption question type. C is defender here, ruling out the possibility which weakens the argument. i am stumped. Please help BTGers...?

Tough one... Cannot come down to answer...
Thought of A, then D, then E and finally selected E....

I would go only with D if the ratio is 10 times instead of 20 times.

is 20 times correct figure here

IMO D

IMO A

I am with E

Conclusion: cost of producing out of photo voltaic cell is less
E on negation: cost of producing power out of photo cell will 'increase'