Architects and engineers have long marveled at the durability of ancient Roman concrete, which has survived for millennia under harsh marine conditions. Unlike modern concrete, which often degrades within decades, Roman concrete grows stronger over time due to a chemical reaction between volcanic ash and seawater. [1] This reaction creates a rare mineral called aluminous tobermorite, which reinforces the structure and prevents cracks from spreading. Modern researchers are studying this ancient formula to develop more sustainable and long-lasting building materials for coastal cities.
The writer is considering adding the following sentence at Point [1]:
"Volcanic eruptions, such as the one at Mount Vesuvius in 79 CE, often caused widespread destruction but left behind valuable ash deposits."
Should the writer make this addition?
- AYes, because it provides important historical context about the volcanic eruptions that supplied Roman builders with ash.
- BYes, because it transitions the paragraph from a discussion of modern concrete to a discussion of ancient concrete.
- No, because it interrupts the paragraph's scientific focus on how the chemical reaction between volcanic ash and seawater makes the concrete durable.Cevap
- DNo, because it contradicts the passage's claim that Roman concrete is more sustainable than modern concrete.