Logical reasoning — Transport economics: Shorter sea route (900 km by road vs 280 km by sea) yields annual fuel savings; infer whether transportation by sea is cheaper than by road or whether fuel must be saved at all costs

Given data

• Statement: The 900 km road distance between Bombay and Jafra is reduced to 280 km by sea, leading to Rs. 7.92 crores per annum saving on fuel.
• Conclusions to test:
  • I: Transportation by sea is cheaper than by road.
  • II: Fuel must be saved to the greatest extent.

Concept/Approach

The statement gives a concrete cost saving (fuel) attributable to the sea option. It does not state a universal moral imperative about saving fuel at any cost.

Step-by-Step reasoning
1) I follows in the relevant sense: for this route, sea transport yields demonstrably lower fuel cost, supporting a “cheaper” inference versus road (at least with respect to fuel expenditure).2) II does not follow: “must be saved to the greatest extent” is a value prescription absent from the statement.

Verification/Alternative

Even if other cost components (time, handling) exist, the statement’s highlighted saving directly supports a cheaper-by-sea inference on fuel cost. No universal dictum about fuel saving is implied.

Common pitfalls

• Interpreting “cheaper” as “cheaper in every cost component.” The given evidence is about fuel savings, which is sufficient for a comparative cheaper inference in typical reasoning tests.

Final Answer
Only conclusion I follows.