※ 引述《heystranger (卍旷世巨鲁霸气登台卍)》之铭言：
: Electric utilities pay less for low-quality coal per ton delivered than for
: high-quality coal. Yet more low-quality coalthan high-quality coal must be
: burned to generate the same amount of electricity. Moreover, per ton of coal
: burned,low-quality coal generates more ash than does high-quality coal, and
: the disposal of ash is becoming more and more expensive.
: The considerations above, if true, most strongly support which of
: the following claims?
不要以为看到support就是加强题～～～
: (A) A coal-burning utility might not be assured of benefiting economically
: by always adhering to the policy of keeping its overall coal purchasing
: costs as low as possible.
: (B) In those regions where the cost of disposing of coal ash is negligible,
: it is more expensive for coal-burning utilities to use high-quality
: coal than low-quality coal.
: (C) Transportation costs represent a smaller proportion of the cost per
: delivered ton for low-quality coal than for high-quality coal.
: (D) It is no less expensive to dispose of a ton of coal ash that results
: from the burning of high-quality coal than it is to dispose of a ton of
: coal ash that results from the burning of low-quality coal.
: (E) In regions where coal-ash disposal is the least expensive, reserves of
: low-quality coal are likely to decline at a faster rate than are
: reserves of high-quality coal.
: