Nile River Aswan Dam RC Manhattan CAT

[rhitian]

For millennia, the Nile River flooded nearly every year as a natural consequence of heavy summer rains; in the 20th century, as the population in the region exploded, the cycle of flooding interspersed with periodic drought caused widespread suffering for the local population. In the mid-1950s, the Egyptian government concluded that a dam was necessary to enable the country's economic development to be on a par with that of Western nations. The Aswan Dam would prevent the annual flooding, generate hydroelectric power, and supply a steady source of water for residents and agricultural activities. By the 1970s, most Egyptian villages had electric power, and the dam provided approximately half of Egypt's entire output of electricity. The benefits were counteracted, however, by consequences which were sometimes slow to appear but ruinous in their long-term effects. Dams prevent silt, which renews the minerals and nutrients that make the land fertile, from flowing to downstream lands. Farmers have had to substitute artificial fertilizers, reducing profits and causing pervasive chemical pollution with deleterious effects for the nearby human, animal, and plant populations. It is difficult to draw definite conclusions about a project with such substantial and varied results, but it would be untenable to assert that the Egyptian government should never have built the Aswan Dam.

The passage implies which of the following about the effects of the Aswan Dam?
Crops need silt in order to flourish.
Farmers are glad that the dam was built, despite the need to purchase fertilizer, because the river no longer floods.
The land around the river is not as naturally fertile as it was before the dam was built.
If the Aswan Dam had never been built, Egypt would now be struggling to produce enough electricity for the country’s needs.
Though there have been negative effects, Egypt is better off than it would have been had the dam never been built.

Answer is C, which makes a general statement that the land around the river - mind you - not the land around the river DOWNSTREAM- but just land around the river is not as naturally fertile as it was before. Quoting from the passage "Dams prevent silt, which renews the minerals and nutrients that make the land fertile, from flowing to downstream lands." ... i can see this as being a great trap answer on a CR question... but this as the correct answer on a RC...... common........

And E is wrong because.."E) While the last sentence indicates that the author thinks we can’t simply say the dam shouldn’t have been built, the author doesn’t explicitly say that Egypt is definitely better off with the dam. Rather, the author says "it is difficult to draw definite conclusions" about the issue." ... the correct wording is untenable.. usually meaning indefensible... so if you cannot defend the opinion that "that the Egyptian government should never have built the Aswan Dam.".. I would think that it is safe to say that Egypt is in fact better off with the Dam... and the answer is even ever so careful not to use "far better off" .. which would be an exaggeration ... it just provides a nudge in the positive direction... as does the word "untenable" ...

I am about to call shenanigans ( ref south park Season 2 Ep 13) if someone does not soon come and defend his or her ( yes, i have been studying SC too) answer...

[george.kourdin]

i am with you....some of the time answer choices and gmat justifications seem somewhat subjective and it is definitely frustrating. getting pissed at the test is counter-productive (doesn't mean i still dont do it), but try to just shrug it off and try learn from it.

with that said, here is why i think C > E


The land around the river is not as naturally fertile as it was before the dam was built.

the land downstream is still land that is around the river. it is just located downstream. if you want to get further into this, i think its safe to assume that as the stilt flows to downstream lands, it renews a portion of the land as it passes downstream. ultimately, the dinstinction between upstream/downstream/midstream etc is irrelevant here. the passage is not really concerned with that. it is all considered as land around the river, which has been affected by the damn.


E
It is difficult to draw definite conclusions about a project with such substantial and varied results, but it would be untenable to assert that the Egyptian government should never have built the Aswan Dam.

before we get into the meaning of this, i think we should have already established answer C as a very strong contender. C provides a fact that we are sure of. we do not need to debate the meaning of it. E is not as clear cut. here's why:
while the author does say that it is untenable to assert that the egyptian gov should've never built the dam, the author does not say that Egypt is better off than it would have been had the damn never been built. in fact, if you look at the first part of the sentence, he explicitly states that it is difficult to draw definite conclusions about the project. in other words, he has no idea whether Egypt is better or worse of.

to clarify: answer choice E is explicitly saying Egypt is better than than it would have been had the dam never been built. this is qualifying statement.

the author is saying that it is unclear whether egypt is better or worse off with the dam, but he thinks that it should have still been built.

see the difference? yes its absurd.

[jnelson0612]

Great job George! E is more of a judgment, whereas C is a fact. Fact is going to trump judgment in this type of problem.

[anubha.iiitm]

Hi,

Another question connected with the same passage as appeared in MGMAT CAT 5:

The author’s primary purpose in writing the passage is to

offer an example of the mixed effects that can result even from a sound plan that accomplishes its goals

demonstrate that advantages are usually outweighed by unanticipated disadvantages

assert that the Egyptian government should not have undertaken these plans for economic development

describe the implementation of a project with significant environmental effects

detail the negative effects suffered because of poor planning

The OA is A. It says that the plan accomplished its goals. However, this is not mentioned anywhere in the passage.The government's idea of introducing the dam was this- "In the mid-1950s, the Egyptian government concluded that a dam was necessary to enable the country's economic development to be on a par with that of Western nations."

The author has not elaborated anything about whether the country's economic development was enabled as much to be on par with the other nations. So how do we derive that the plan achieved its goal?

Honestly, none of the choices appeal to me. Is the question fairly structured? Isn't "goal" too strong a word to use?

[george.kourdin]

two reasons why its A

1) process of elumination: no other answer choice comes as close to being correct as does A. its important to keep in mind that the GMAT will not provide the perfect answer among the answer choices. moreoever, your definition of the perfect answer may not necessarily match that of GMAT. this is their test and they get away with whatever they want and will always be right. with that said, we have to find the least worst answer. an answer that is the best possible option among the ones presented. in this case this is A by POE. while the language in A "may" be debatable (and i will try to explain in a bit that it is not), the wording of the other answer choices is clearly wrong and makes them inferior to A.

demonstrate that advantages are usually outweighed by unanticipated disadvantages
thats not it. the advantages are clearly stated in the passage and there is no indication that disadvantages outweigh advantages. the author does opine on this at any point. the last sentence should shed any doubts: the author says that despite whatever crappy externalities the damn may have caused, the project should still have been built.

assert that the Egyptian government should not have undertaken these plans for economic developmentsee above. the author says the opposite in the last sentence. clearly wrong.

describe the implementation of a project with significant environmental effects
yeah...no. this is the answer that will attempt to confuse the reader by relating to the middle of the passage where farming/tilt is discussed. thats obviously not the main point of the para. also, the author does not describe implementation. we are not told how it is built. we are told that about the reasons for this dam and the aftermath.

detail the negative effects suffered because of poor planning again, a statement that relates to the 1/3 of the passage that discusses the negative effects. this is wrong for two reasons: 1) both the statement in the first half of the passage, which lists the main acomplishments of the dam, and the author's last statement are important. these statemens are ignored in this option. its too narrow in scope. 2) there is zero indication of poor planning. this was not the main point of the passage.


2) i see what you are saying when you are looking for economic effects, but that was not the goal of the dam. so just because it wasn't mentioned in the passage, doesn't mean that this is wrong. the overarching goal was to get the economy on par and this was going to get done through hydroelectric power+blah blah whatever else is mentioned in the next sentence. let's read read this:

In the mid-1950s, the Egyptian government concluded that a dam was necessary to enable the country's economic development to be on a par with that of Western nations. The Aswan Dam would prevent the annual flooding, generate hydroelectric power, and supply a steady source of water for residents and agricultural activities. By the 1970s, most Egyptian villages had electric power, and the dam provided approximately half of Egypt's entire output of electricity

okay the gov. wanted to build a dam to get Egypt on par with the west. the dam would do XYZ. by the 1970s XYZ happened.

so...did the dam acomplish its goals?

[jnelson0612]

George, outstanding work!

[JbhB682]

The passage implies which of the following about the effects of the Aswan Dam?

(A) Crops need silt in order to flouris
(B) Farmers are glad that the dam was built, despite the need to purchase fertilizer, because the river no longer floods.
(C) The land around the river is not as fertile as it was before the dam was built.
(D) If the Aswan Dam had never been built, Egypt would now be struggling to produce enough electricity for the country’s needs.
(E) Though there have been negative effects, Egypt is better off than it would have been had the dam never been built.

i got the above question and had two quick follow ups

Option C talks about "land around the river" per the blue highlight in option C.

The passage only talks about silt not flowing to "downstream lands"

Downstream lands is NOT the same as land around the river per my understanding. "Downstream lands" can be 10 kms away from the dam and is certainly not "land around the river"

Thus I eliminated C because the passage never talks about "land around the river"

Thoughts ?

[esledge]

Thoughts:
(1) Just as "downstream lands" can be 10kms away, so could "land around the river" be 10kms away; the choice didn't say how far around the river. (In any case, silt would have accumulated "around the river" before ever reaching 10 kms away. So since the passage said the dam prevented the 10kms-away silt deposits, it is less extreme to say that the dam prevented the nearby silt deposits. Choice (C) is safe, then.)

(2) This question asks what "the passage implies," so it is an inference question. Expect a little rephrasing between the passage and the correct choice on inference questions; "downstream lands" getting rephrased to "land around the river" is not too much. You can demand closer matching on an "according to the passage" question.