hard · Gre Verbal

Proponents of the new reservoir claim it is necessary because the region's water demand is projected to double within twenty years. [[But that projection assumes current per-capita consumption will hold steady, whereas every comparable region that adopted tiered pricing saw consumption per person fall by a third.]] Critics of the reservoir seize on this to argue that no new supply is needed at all. [[This overstates the case: even with reduced per-capita use, a growing population could still push total demand above existing capacity.]] In the argument, the two boldface portions play which of the following roles?

1. The first undermines a premise of the proponents' case; the second checks an overreaching inference drawn from that first point by the critics.
2. The first is the proponents' own conclusion in favor of the reservoir; the second is the critics' opposing conclusion against building it at all.
3. The first supplies support for going ahead and building the new reservoir; the second supplies grounds for opposing and rejecting its construction.
4. The first is the argument's own final conclusion; the second is a premise the argument offers in direct support of reaching that final conclusion.
5. Both boldface portions work together to support the critics' central claim that no new water supply of any kind is actually needed here.

Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →