The argument that uses a non sequitur fallacy is C, "Regulations on motorists should be lifted because factories are a bigger source of pollution"
Explanation: Non sequitur fallacy is when the conclusion doesn't follow the premises. That said in different words, the premises is an irrelevant reason to support the conclusion.
So, as true as it is that factories are a bigger source of pollution, the conclusion does not follow from the premises. The fact that regulations on motorists should be lifted, does not necessarily mean that the reason to do that is that factories are a bigger source of pollution.
The answers that i know are below.
bae
babe
kebab
