Please correct my understanding:
The argument states it's irrelevant if the effluents are causing damage to the environment. Thus, why would it be overly restrictive if environment damage is not being caused. It was concluded that it did not matter whether or not damage was caused, restrictions will still be in place.
That is even if no damage was caused, the controls would still be in place because it was decided.
On the other hand, D states that the chemicals did not reach the sea, thus the
...
The argument states it's irrelevant if the effluents are causing damage to the environment. Thus, why would it be overly restrictive if environment damage is not being caused. It was concluded that it did not matter whether or not damage was caused, restrictions will still be in place.
That is even if no damage was caused, the controls would still be in place because it was decided.
On the other hand, D states that the chemicals did not reach the sea, thus the
...




.jpg)



