To analyze the data properly, let's break down the two options provided in the study:
-
Building Flood Diversion Channels:
- Time required: 3 years
- Initial cost: $20 million
- Annual maintenance costs: $10,000
- Number of residents displaced: (not specified but needs consideration)
-
Elevating Buildings in the Flood Plain:
- Time required: 5 years
- Initial cost: $55 million
- Annual maintenance costs: $1,000
- Number of residents displaced: (not specified but needs consideration)
Now, evaluating the given statements:
-
"The town should build the diversion channels because this option is more cost efficient within the first 5 years."
- This statement is logical since the initial cost and maintenance for the diversion channels appear lower over the first 5 years compared to elevating buildings.
-
"The town should elevate buildings in the flood plain because the maintenance costs are lower."
- This statement is true regarding maintenance costs but does not justify the higher initial cost or time required.
-
"The town should elevate buildings in the flood plain because the work will be completed sooner."
- This statement is inaccurate, as elevating the buildings takes longer (5 years) compared to building diversion channels (3 years).
-
"The town should build the diversion channels because this option will displace the most people."
- This statement lacks sufficient context, as the number of residents displaced is not provided for either option.
Based on these evaluations, the best analysis of the data is the first statement: "The town should build the diversion channels because this option is more cost efficient within the first 5 years." This statement takes into account both the initial cost and the timeline for completion, making it the most comprehensive and accurate assessment.