Because dried peat moss

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Weak: may be unsound29% picked this

   Using a product may be environmentally unsound even if the product is a renewable resource and

   The conclusion may be true is almost always going to be too weak for any Strengthen / Sufficient Assumption / Justify task. SM is a renewable resource and contains no chemical additive, so this rule does apply, but it just allows for the possibility that using SM may be unsound.

   29%
2. B

   Correct62% picked this

   A practice is not environmentally sound if it significantly reduces the amount of oxygen

   Why this is right

   This is pretty similar to our prephrase. The use of SM significantly reduces oxygen supply, since we are told that SM is basically the #1 oxygen supplier there is, and the garden soil industry is rapidly depleting the supply of SM.

   Skill tested: Principle-Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   62%
3. C

   Bad Conclusion / Premise Match2% picked this

   A practice is environmentally sound if it helps to protect rain forests that contribute large amounts of

   Since this rule says, _____ ? environmentally sound we can instantly get rid of it. We need a rule that has "not environmentally sound" on the right side. Beyond that deal breaker, the trigger of this rule doesn't apply to sphagnum moss; we aren't told that it helps to protect rain forests. Its oxygen output is just compared to that of rain forests.

   2%
4. D

   Bad Conclusion / Premise Match5% picked this

   If the environmental benefits of a practice outweigh the environmental costs, that practice can be

   This answer can also be summarily rejected because it's set up to conclude that something is environmentally sound, and we need a rule that allows us to conclude that something is not environmentally sound. We also wouldn't haven't been able to precisely judge whether the benefits outweighs the costs when it comes to the environmental impact of using sphagnum moss (we were told good and bad things, but not how to weight those against each other).

   5%
5. E

   Weak Conclusion / Premise Match2% picked this

   If the practices of an industry threaten a vital resource, those practices

   We're trying to prove that a practice is environmentally unsound, not that it should be banned. It's okay for our answer to be stronger than what we need, but it's not clear that saying "something should be banned" necessarily means that it was "environmentally unsound". It's also less clear from the paragraph that using sphagnum moss threatens a vital resource. It reduces the supply of oxygen, but does it threaten oxygen? Because the trigger of this rule is harder to match up and because the conclusion isn't a solid meaning match for "not environmentally sound", this loses out to the correct answer.

   2%