The population of Giro City has increased since it was founded. The graph models the linear relationship between the population and the number of years it had been founded for.

Question

Giro City Population
Population (Thousands)

Years
y-axis goes to 60 and x-axis ges to 10. line starts at 0 and goes up to the end of the graph wiht an arrow at the end.

Which of these best describes the population of Giro City?
Responses
A The population has increased by 15,000 people per year. The population has increased by 15,000 people per year.
B The population was 6,000 after 45 years.The population was 6,000 after 45 years.
C The population has increased by 7,500 people per year. The population has increased by 7,500 people per year.
D The population was 60 people after 8 years.

Answer 1

To determine which statement best describes the population of Giro City, let's analyze the graph based on the provided information.

1. Graph Details:

   • The y-axis (Population in Thousands) goes up to 60.
   • The x-axis (Years since founded) goes up to 10.
   • The line starts at the origin (0,0) and goes upwards.

2. Calculating Population Increase:

   • If the total population reaches 60,000 by the end of 10 years, the increase in population over this period would be:
     • \( \text{Population Increase} = 60,000 - 0 = 60,000 \)
     • Dividing this by the number of years (10) gives:
     • \( \frac{60,000}{10} = 6,000 \) people per year.

This calculation suggests the population grows by 6,000 people per year, which converts to 6,000 in the graph as the y-axis is in thousands.

Now, let's evaluate the responses:

A. The population has increased by 15,000 people per year. -- (Incorrect) B. The population was 6,000 after 45 years. -- (Incorrect based on the years given) C. The population has increased by 7,500 people per year. -- (Incorrect) D. The population was 60 people after 8 years. -- (Incorrect as well, considering the population should be interpreted in thousands)

None of the options given directly relate to the calculated growth of 6,000 people per year. Given the options presented, it seems there might be an error or miscommunication regarding how the graph was interpreted or how the population is expressed.

If we assume the increase is represented in thousands, the closest correct understanding would suggest that there is no accurate answer in the provided choices based on the graph's interpretation. If a recalibration of the response options allows for "6,000 people per year," that would be the correct answer.