Depending on who is giving their opinion this project was either a great success, or a large waste of time and money. The supporters of the project have several valid points.
1: Their first point is that it has helped dramatically with downstream flooding and has saved many lives and destruction.
2: The second point is that this is a renewable and clean source of energy that is saving our environment with almost zero emissions.
Although the dam has displaced many people, the reservoir created upstream has provided recreation for many people.
To the supporters, the dam has saved the environment and most importantly human lives.
The people who are against the dam also have several valid statements.
1: The dam is detrimental to the environment by disrupting the fish migrations, thus lowering fish populations and hurting fishermen.
2: The dam also has destroyed a lot of habitat upstream forcing animals to move (fragmentation).
3: The main point made by the negative is the displacement of over 1.3 million people. The time, money, and effort made to move so many people is not worth such a small amount of energy produced by the dam.
Overall, this dam can be seen as good or evil. In reality, it is built to stay and the negatives frankly have to deal with its existence. Either way one looks at the dam one thing can be concluded, new energy sources need to be developed. Solar is a great method of energy generation, yet at this point it is only 10% efficient. Scientists worldwide need to begin to enhance wind, solar, nuclear, hydro, and search for new innovative methods that will save the world from an energy crisis.
According to the individual's experience or personality, corollaries become formulated, through individual seems to have its corollary that could be altered as per the circumstances.
It's also characterized when different individuals experience the same phenomenon in different ways.
The remaining three alternatives are not linked to the situation at hand. So, option c was its right option.
