Well, I still don't agree with much of what she has to say. Parts of her book seem downright absurd. ``How will the command area'', says she of the land to be irrigated by the series of dams, ``accustomed only to seasonal irrigation, its entire ecology designed for that single pulseof monsoon rain, react to being irrigated the whole year around?'' Soil which produced only a single crop will now produce several crops a year, farmers will start growing cash crops (for selling) instead of subsistence maize and barley (for eating) and, ``by linking themselves to the `market' they lose control over their lives''! (exclamation mark mine)

Other parts of her thesis appear equally incredulous. The Sardar Sarovar Projects, she says, will not produce 1,450 megawatts of power, but only 3 percent of that, or 50 megawatts (you don't produce power in megawatts, but that's another matter). Why? Because the project has mutually conflicting aims -- ``irrigation uses up the water you need to produce power.'' Actually, the way most hydro projects are designed, the power is produced by water falling on turbines, and it is after the power is produced that it is sent on along the canals to be used for irrigation -- Devi Lal once said the water Haryana got for irrigation was useless as the electricity wastaken out at Bhakra! In some projects, it is true, irrigation is done directly from the reservoir, and to that extent water available for generating power is reduced. It is, however, after taking this into account that planners said the Sardar Sarovar projects would have power generating capacity of 1,450 megawatts. If the water was to be used only for power generation and not for irrigation, the power capacity would be many times more.

What's more disturbing, however, is the lack of government response to certain `facts' that Arundhati talks of in her book. If they're true, it's frightening and a very sad commentary on the way planning is done. A list of a few points Arundhati makes that need to be specifically addressed: