According to the InfoTrends 2011 report which statement is true?

Question

Options

• AThe use of non-HP cartridges will result in a 10% smaller carbon footprint due to the higher
• B91% of HP original cartridges will have a 92% smaller carbon footprint than remanufactured
• CWhen considering reliability and print quality issues, the carbon footprint of a remanufactured
• DThe use of remanufactured or HP cartridges will have no significant impact on the carbon

• A
  2% (1)
• B
  91% (52)
• C
  2% (1)
• D
  5% (3)

Explanation

Option B accurately reflects the InfoTrends 2011 report's finding that 91% of HP original cartridges produce a 92% smaller carbon footprint compared to remanufactured cartridges - a significant environmental advantage for genuine HP products driven by reliability and fewer failed print attempts.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A is incorrect because it inverts the finding - non-HP (remanufactured) cartridges are associated with a larger, not smaller, carbon footprint due to reliability issues causing reprints.
• C is a partial truth trap: while reliability and print quality issues do factor into carbon footprint calculations, the statement is incomplete and doesn't reflect the report's specific conclusion.
• D is directly contradicted by the report, which found a substantial difference (92%) in carbon footprint between the two cartridge types.

Memory tip: Remember "91/92" - 91% of HP cartridges have a 92% smaller footprint. Think of it as "HP wins on both counts: reliability AND environment," which is the core message the report was designed to convey.

No community discussion yet for this question.