Logical Reasoning Questions for CLAT | QB Set 9

Barely weeks from a scorching summer, Bengalureans are deeply worried about a perennial problem that just does not seem to go away: Drinking water woes. Can a smart water-pricing strategy boost conservation or is a separate law the only way to give it some teeth? Many water experts will tell you this for the failure of conservation efforts so far: Despite the enormous costs involved in pumping Cauvery water from over 120 kms, it is supplied at ₹7 per kilo litre in the city. 

“For a thousand litres, you are paying just ₹7-8. That is cheap, and people don’t feel the pinch. There is no limit in supply, and there is no incentive to save water,” as Senior Scientist A.R. “This is call for monetizing water beyond a certain slab is also linked to deliberately creating scarcity. Things like rationing will have to happen. And like in electricity, you may want to ensure that there is no wastage by educating people, rather than just letting the economy take over,” says water activist Kshitij Urs. The city seriously lacks a law that mandates water conservation. “It is free for all now. If you want to use one lakh litres a month, do you think there is any restriction? No. You have the ability to pay, you pay and get it. Conservation measures should be enforced for every house, every apartment, institution, hotel and every industry,” says Shivakumar. 

So, how should consumption be measured and what is the pricing strategy to adopt? Srikant Narasimhan, Bengaluru Navanirmana Party (BNP) General Secretary and Bangalore Apartments Federation (BAF) Founder, has a suggestion: “For an individual house with five to six people, the rough water usage should be about 500 litres per house per day. This means 15 kilo litres a month, of which only 30% should be Cauvery water.” The rate should be kept low for anything less than 5 kilo liters of Cauvery water per house, he points out. “Currently, they charge apartments a flat rate of ₹25 per kiloliter, which is exorbitant and ridiculous. There should be a proper slab structure, with low rates for 0 to 5 kl and 5 to 10 kl. Let the rate be ₹50 or ₹60 for more than 10kl. That is how you should penalise over-usage,” Srikant explains.

SOURCE:
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/article67792978.ece?ex_testId=10&ex_testVariant=cx_1&cx_artPos=1&cx_experienceId=EXDJ12CX29QK#cxrecs_s

Questions:

1. What assumption underlies the argument in the passage?
(a) The suggested water pricing strategy will be accepted and implemented without resistance.
(b) Creating scarcity deliberately is an effective approach to water conservation.
(c) Rationing and education alone can lead to a significant reduction in water wastage.
(d) The absence of water conservation laws is the only factor contributing to unrestricted water usage.

2. What can be inferred from the passage regarding the current mindset of Bengalureans towards water usage?
(a) Bengalureans are motivated to conserve water due to the low cost of water.
(b) The current water pricing system creates a sense of urgency to save water.
(c) People in Bengaluru are indifferent to the issue of water scarcity.
(d) There is an awareness among Bengalureans about the high cost of pumping Cauvery water.

3. Which statement would strengthen the argument that a separate law is essential for water conservation in Bengaluru?
(a) The cost of pumping Cauvery water is expected to decrease in the near future.
(b) Rationing and education alone have proven ineffective in curbing water wastage.
(c) Other cities with water conservation laws have successfully addressed similar challenges.
(d) Bengaluru’s water crisis is solely due to the absence of a smart water-pricing strategy.

4. Which statement would weaken the argument that a smart water-pricing strategy is crucial for addressing Bengaluru’s water crisis?
(a) The current water pricing system is already effective in encouraging water conservation.
(b) Other cities have faced similar water crises despite having water-pricing strategies.
(c) The cost of pumping Cauvery water is expected to increase in the near future.
(d) The absence of a law mandating water conservation is the primary reason for unrestricted water usage.

5. What is the most reasonable conclusion based on the passage?
(a) The lack of a water conservation law is the sole cause of Bengaluru’s water crisis.
(b) A smart water-pricing strategy should be combined with legislative measures for effective water management.
(c) The cost of pumping Cauvery water is the primary reason for the low water pricing in Bengaluru.
(d) Water conservation efforts in Bengaluru have been unsuccessful due to an ineffective pricing strategy.

Answers and Explanations:

1. Answer: D

Explanation: The absence of water conservation laws is the only factor contributing to unrestricted water usage. The passage assumes that the primary reason for the failure of conservation efforts is the lack of legislation. It implies that if there were laws in place, there would be restrictions on water usage.

2. Answer: C

Explanation: People in Bengaluru are indifferent to the issue of water scarcity. The passage suggests that the low cost of water leads to a lack of incentive to save water, indicating a level of indifference among Bengalureans. The absence of restrictions and the ability to pay for water usage contribute to this perception.

3. Answer: C

Explanation: Other cities with water conservation laws have successfully addressed similar challenges. This statement strengthens the argument for a separate law by providing evidence that other cities have effectively tackled water conservation issues through legislation. It suggests that such laws are a proven and successful approach.

4. Answer: A

Explanation: The current water pricing system is already effective in encouraging water conservation. This statement weakens the argument for a smart water-pricing strategy by suggesting that the existing pricing system is effective, contrary to the notion that a new strategy is required.

5. Answer: B

Explanation: A smart water-pricing strategy should be combined with legislative measures for effective water management. The passage suggests that both a water-pricing strategy and a law mandating water conservation are needed to address the issue in Bengaluru. The failure of conservation efforts is attributed to the low cost of water and the absence of restrictions, indicating the necessity for a dual approach.