Critical Reasoning

Pedro: Unlike cloth diapers, disposable diapers are a threat to the environment. Sixteen billion disposable diapers are discarded annually, filling up landfills at an alarming rate. So people must stop buying disposable diapers and use cloth diapers.
Maria: But you forget that cloth diapers must be washed in hot water, which requires energy. Moreover, the resulting wastewater pollutes our rivers. When families use diaper services, diapers must be delivered by fuel-burning trucks that pollute the air and add to traffic congestion.
Maria objects to Pedro’s argument by
(A) claiming that Pedro overstates the negative evidence about disposable diapers in the course of his argument in favor of cloth diapers
(B) indicating that Pedro draws a hasty conclusion, based on inadequate evidence about cloth diapers
(C) pointing out that there is an ambiguous use of the word “disposable” in Pedro’s argument
(D) demonstrating that cloth diapers are a far more serious threat to the environment than disposable diapers are
(E) suggesting that the economic advantages of cloth diapers outweigh whatever environmental damage they may cause

It appears to be "B"?
Pedro is concluding without providing adequate evidence about cloth diapers....Maria starts her argument by pointing out that Pedro is ignorant of (forgot) the fact that......so,I guess its B.

i think i prefer to go with option E because Maria argument shows that cloth diapers pose more threat to the environment than disposable diaper. when the water in the environment is contaminated by unwanted substances, it will affect the environment and affect many lives and home because water is inevitable in the society.