Geology 2021 Paper II 50 marks Describe

Q8

(a) How is unscientific development of catchments situated in mountainous regions responsible for increased threat of floods in plains? (10 marks) (b) Describe various types of radioactive wastes. Write an account on various methods of their disposal. (20 marks) (c) What is meant by waterlogging? Describe in detail the remedial measures of waterlogging and salinity. (20 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) मैदानी क्षेत्रों में बाढ़ के बढ़ते खतरे के लिए पर्वतीय क्षेत्रों में स्थित जलग्रहण क्षेत्रों का अवैज्ञानिक विकास किस प्रकार जिम्मेदार है? (10 अंक) (b) विभिन्न प्रकार के रेडियोधर्मी अपशिष्टों का वर्णन कीजिए। इनके निपटान की विभिन्न विधियों का विवरण दीजिए। (20 अंक) (c) जलभराव से क्या तात्पर्य है? जलभराव व लवणता के उपचारात्मक उपायों का विस्तृत वर्णन कीजिए। (20 अंक)

Directive word: Describe

This question asks you to describe. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'describe' demands systematic, detailed exposition with factual precision. Allocate time proportionally: ~20% (200 words) for part (a) on Himalayan catchment mismanagement, ~40% (400 words) for part (b) covering radioactive waste classification and disposal protocols, and ~40% (400 words) for part (c) on waterlogging mechanisms and reclamation techniques. Structure each part with definition-cause-effect-solution sequencing; use sub-headings for clarity. Conclude with integrated remarks on sustainable development.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Deforestation, slope destabilization, and reduced infiltration in Himalayan catchments (e.g., Uttarakhand) increase runoff velocity and sediment load, amplifying downstream flood risk in Indo-Gangetic plains
  • Part (a): Specific unscientific practices—unregulated road cutting, terracing failures, and encroachment on river channels—disrupt natural drainage buffers
  • Part (b): Classification of radioactive wastes by activity level (low, intermediate, high) and half-life; distinction between spent fuel and reprocessed wastes
  • Part (b): Disposal methods: near-surface engineered facilities for low-level waste, deep geological repositories (granite, salt dome, basalt) for high-level waste, and vitrification processes
  • Part (c): Definition of waterlogging as saturation of root zone above field capacity; causes including excessive irrigation, poor drainage, and impermeable subsurface layers
  • Part (c): Remedial measures: biological (afforestation, crop rotation), mechanical (tile drainage, vertical drainage), and chemical (gypsum application, leaching) for salinity reclamation
  • Integration: Link between catchment mismanagement and groundwater recharge patterns affecting regional waterlogging potential

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness25%12.5Precise definitions for all three parts: hydrological connectivity in (a), radionuclide decay chains and waste classification criteria in (b), and soil-water-plant relationships including pF curves in (c); no conflation of surface flooding with groundwater waterloggingGenerally accurate concepts with minor errors—vague waste categories, imprecise drainage terminology, or conflated catchment-plain processes without clear mechanismFundamental misconceptions: treating waterlogging as merely excess rainfall, confusing radioactive with hazardous waste disposal, or attributing floods solely to rainfall intensity without development linkage
Diagram / cross-section15%7.5Three distinct diagrams: (a) schematic catchment cross-section showing disturbed vs. natural hydrological pathways; (b) deep geological repository multi-barrier system; (c) tile drainage layout with hydraulic gradient and salt leaching profile—properly labelled with geological unitsTwo adequate diagrams with partial labelling, or three diagrams with missing geological context; hand-drawn but decipherableSingle generic diagram or none; diagrams without geological relevance (e.g., flowchart instead of cross-section) or unlabelled sketches
Field evidence20%10Specific citations: Kedarnath 2013 floods for (a); Jaduguda uranium mine tailings or proposed repository sites (Bhabha Atomic Research Centre studies) for (b); Indira Gandhi Canal command area waterlogging or Haryana Agricultural University data for (c)Generic references to 'Himalayan floods' or 'Punjab waterlogging' without specific events, institutions, or years; plausible but unsupported claimsNo Indian examples; hypothetical scenarios or foreign-only cases (Chernobyl, Netherlands polders) without Indian applicability
Quantitative reasoning20%10Numerical data: runoff coefficients pre/post deforestation, half-life values for major radionuclides (Cs-137, Sr-90), critical water table depths (1.5-2.0m), leaching requirements (mm water/mm salt), or drainage spacing calculations using Hooghoudt equationIsolated numbers without context (e.g., 'high radiation' without units) or correct order-of-magnitude estimates without workingNo quantitative content; purely qualitative descriptions or incorrect units/orders of magnitude
Indian / economic relevance20%10Economic impacts quantified: flood damage costs (NDMA estimates), agricultural productivity loss in waterlogged areas (₹ thousands/hectare), nuclear waste management budget; policy integration (National Water Mission, AERB regulations, Command Area Development programmes)Mention of economic consequences without figures, or policy names without linkage to technical contentNo economic or policy dimension; purely academic treatment ignoring livelihood impacts and governance frameworks

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →

More from Geology 2021 Paper II