Question Details

Passage:


Over the course of the twentieth century, humans built, on average, one large dam a day, hulking structures of steel and concrete designed to control flooding, facilitate irrigation, and generate electricity. Dams were also lucrative contracts, large-scale employers, and the physical instantiation of a messianic drive to conquer territories and control nature. Some of the results of that drive were charismatic mega-infrastructure—the Hoover on the Colorado River or the Aswan on the Nile—but most of the tens of thousands of dams that dot the Earth’s landscape have drawn little attention. These are the smaller, though not inconsequential, barriers that today impede the flow of water on nearly two-thirds of the world’s large waterways. Chances are, what your map calls a “lake” is actually a reservoir, and that thin blue line that emerges from it once flowed very differently.


Damming a river is always a partisan act. Even when explicit infrastructure goals—irrigation, flood control, electrification—were met, other consequences were significant and often deleterious. Across the world, river control displaced millions of people, threatening livelihoods, foodways, and cultures. In the western United States, dams were often an instrument of colonialism, used to dispossess Indigenous people and subsidize settler agriculture. And as dams slowed the flow of water, inhibited the movement of nutrients, and increased the amount of toxic algae and other parasites, they snuffed out entire river ecologies. Declining fish populations are the most evident effect, but dams also threaten a host of other animals—from birds and reptiles to fungi and plants—with extinction. Every major dam, then, is also a sacrifice zone, a place where lives, livelihoods, and ways of life are eliminated so that new sorts of landscapes can support water-intensive agriculture and cities that sprout downstream of new reservoirs.


Such sacrifices have been justified as offerings at the temples of modernity. Justified by—and for—whom, though? Over the course of the twentieth century, rarely were the costs and benefits weighed thoughtfully and decided democratically. As Kader Asmal, chair of the landmark 2000 World Commission on Dams, concluded, “There have been precious few, if any, comprehensive, independent analyses as to why dams came about, how dams perform over time, and whether we are getting a fair return from our 2 trillion Dollar investment.” A quarter-century later, Asmal’s words ring ever truer. A litany of dams built in the mid-twentieth century are approaching the end of their expected lives, with worrying prospects for their durability. Droughts, magnified and multiplied by the effects of climate change, have forced more and more to run below capacity. If ever there were a time to rethink the mania for dams, it would be now.


There is some evidence that a combination of opposition, alternative energy sources, and a lack of viable projects has slowed the construction of major dams. But a wave of recent and ongoing construction, from India and China to Ethiopia and Canada, continues to tilt the global balance firmly in favor of water impoundment.


Which one of the following sets of terms is closest to mapping the key arguments of the passage?

Options

A

Mega-infrastructure– Sacrifice zone– Worshipping modernity– Water impoundment

B

Partisan act– Threatened livelihoods– Toxic algae– Quarter century

C

Lucrative contracts– Sacrifice zone– Expected lives– Global balance

D

Physical instantiation– Partisan act– Decided democratically– Alternative energy

Show Answer

Correct Answer :

Option A

Mega-infrastructure– Sacrifice zone– Worshipping modernity– Water impoundment

Solution :

The correct answer is Mega-infrastructure– Sacrifice zone– Worshipping modernity– Water impoundment.

Step-by-Step Explanation:

To determine which set of terms best maps the key arguments of the passage, we can analyze the structural progression of the text and trace how each term represents a core thematic argument:

1. Mega-infrastructure (Paragraph 1): The passage begins by defining dams as massive physical constructions ("charismatic mega-infrastructure") built to control nature, generate power, and serve as symbols of human engineering triumph.

2. Sacrifice zone (Paragraph 2): The author then argues that damming rivers is a partisan act with severe, destructive consequences. It displaces millions of people and ruins river ecosystems, turning these regions into "sacrifice zones" where local lives and ecologies are destroyed to support downstream cities and agriculture.

3. Worshipping modernity (Paragraph 3): The text notes that these heavy sacrifices were historically justified as "offerings at the temples of modernity"—a blind faith in technological progress that bypassed democratic oversight and thorough cost-benefit analyses.

4. Water impoundment (Paragraphs 4 and 5): Finally, the passage addresses the current global situation. Despite aging infrastructure and climate challenges, a wave of new construction continues to tilt the global balance heavily in favor of "water impoundment" (retaining water behind dams).

This sequence captures the core narrative arc of the passage: from the creation of these massive structures, to their ecological and social costs, to their ideological justification, and finally to the ongoing global trend of water retention.

Unlock Our Free Library

Access expert-curated educational resources and study materials—completely free.

Ask AI Tutor
5 left
Q1 View Question & Options
AI Tutor is solving this question...
Reading question context & options...