Enviromentalists

[metallicafan]

Environmentalists fear that looming global economic slowdown will thwart efforts to curb carbon emissions. Since complying with strict environmental regulations would impose a significant financial burden on many businesses and industries, most will balk at the prospect and not reduce their respective carbon footprints. Governments, meanwhile, will be reductant to impose environmental restrictions, for fear of suppressing economic growth.

What is the assumption for this argument?

a. Governments, whether local or federal, will not raise taxes on already financially burdened populations.
b. There are no cost-cutting measures that businesses could implement to help them survive a compromised economic climate.
c. Tax cuts alone will not stop industries from resisting efforts to curb carbon emissions.
d. A worldwide economic slowdown would not significantly reduce energy demand and industrial output, both of which are linked to high levels of carbon emissions.
e. High levels of economic growth are impossible to achieve with any level of reduction in global energy consumption.

Why not C?, It seems a defender assumption to me.

OA:_D_

[vk_vinayak]

While mentioning OA along the question, please use the spoilers.

[Bill@VeritasPrep]

The conclusion is the first sentence: environmentalists fear that the economic slowdown will thwart efforts to curb carbon emissions.

A--There is nothing about taxes in the stimulus

B--The existence of cost-cutting measures is irrelevant to the conclusion.

C--There is nothing about taxes in the stimulus

D--The negation of this answer is that the economic slowdown WILL reduce energy demand and industrial output. This contradicts the conclusion that economic problems will thwart efforts to curb carbon emissions, so it is the right answer.

E--The environmentalists are not concerned with high levels of economic growth.

[Birottam Dutta]

D is the only option which mentions the implicit assumption in the argument, that being that the financial downturn will not lead to a reduced energy consumption in the world.

All other options re out of context.