The history of renewable energy suggests there is a steep learning curve, meaning that, as more is produced, costs fall rapidly because of economies of scale and learning by doing. The firms’ green innovation is path-dependent: the more a firm does, the more it is likely to do in the future. The strongest evidence for this is the collapse in the price of solar energy, which became about 90% cheaper during the 2010s, repeatedly beating forecasts. Moving early and gradually gives economies more time to adjust, allowing them to reap the benefits of path-dependent green investment without much disruption. A late, more chaotic transition is costlier.
With reference to the above passage, the following assumptions have been made :
1. Path-dependent green investments will eventually most likely benefit growth as well as public finances in a country like India.
II. If other green technologies follow the same pattern as that of solar energy, there will most likely be an easy green
transition.
Which of the above assumptions is/are valid?

Options