SAT Pastpaper with Solutions

Questions 1-11 are based on the following passage.
Survival in the Hostile Environment of NW Rota-1
[1] Sixty miles north of Guam and more than
1,700 feet under the ocean’s surface is the summit of
NW Rota-1, an undersea volcano discovered in 2003.
[2] Surprisingly, the volcano appears to have been
continuously active; it even grew 130 feet in height
between 2006 and 2009. [3] Yet despite the hostile
environment created by the constant volcanic activity, life
is thriving there. [4] Special adaptations are the key to
survival. [5] At that depth, water pressure suppresses the
explosive force of the volcano’s eruptions, allowing
scientists to (1) watch and observe them up close via remotely operated vehicles.(2)

NW Rota-1 is far below the ocean’s photic zone
where sunlight drives photosynthesis; (3) nevertheless,
bacteria supporting a unique food web have adapted to
this perpetually dark environment. The bacteria have
evolved to use hydrogen sulfide instead of sunlight for
the energy that drives their metabolic processes, and
hydrothermal venting is the source of the chemical soup
necessary to support (4) him or her. Seawater seeping
into fissures in the ocean floor is heated by underlying
magma, and the heat drives chemical reactions that
remove oxygen, sulfates, (5) and remove other chemicals
from the water. Once the superheated water (up to 750°F)
rises through vents in the ocean floor, additional
reactions cause minerals and compounds to precipitate
onto the seafloor, where bacteria feed on them Loihi shrimp—originally thought to exist only
around an undersea volcano near (5) Hawaii, survive by
using tiny, shear-like claws to harvest rapidly growing
bacterial filaments covering rocks near NW Rota-1’s
hydrothermal vents. The Loihi shrimp spend most of
their time grazing on the bacteria and evading another,
previously unknown, species of shrimp. Shrimp of that
species also graze on bacterial filaments as juveniles,
(7) resulting from their ability to cope with the noxious
environment around the volcano. They feed on the Loihi
shrimp and other organisms that are overcome by the
toxic plumes of volcanic gas and ash.
During an underwater eruption, steam quickly
(8) condenses. The steam leaves only carbon dioxide
bubbles and droplets of molten sulfur. This means that
the water near NW Rota-1 is more acidic than (9) that of
stomach acid, presenting yet another challenge to
life-forms living nearby. As the carbon dioxide level in
Earth’s atmosphere rises, the (10) worlds’ ocean’s absorb
more carbon 11 dioxide. Organisms flourishing near the
volcano may help biologists understand how life adjusts
to very acidic conditions. In addition, NW Rota-1 is a
natural laboratory where scientists can study conditions
that may be similar to those that gave rise to life on Earth
and perhaps even other worlds

Questions 1-11 are based on the following passage.
Survival in the Hostile Environment of NW Rota-1
[1] Sixty miles north of Guam and more than
1,700 feet under the ocean’s surface is the summit of
NW Rota-1, an undersea volcano discovered in 2003.
[2] Surprisingly, the volcano appears to have been
continuously active; it even grew 130 feet in height
between 2006 and 2009. [3] Yet despite the hostile
environment created by the constant volcanic activity, life
is thriving there. [4] Special adaptations are the key to
survival. [5] At that depth, water pressure suppresses the
explosive force of the volcano’s eruptions, allowing
scientists to (1) watch and observe them up close via remotely operated vehicles.(2)

NW Rota-1 is far below the ocean’s photic zone
where sunlight drives photosynthesis; (3) nevertheless,
bacteria supporting a unique food web have adapted to
this perpetually dark environment. The bacteria have
evolved to use hydrogen sulfide instead of sunlight for
the energy that drives their metabolic processes, and
hydrothermal venting is the source of the chemical soup
necessary to support (4) him or her. Seawater seeping
into fissures in the ocean floor is heated by underlying
magma, and the heat drives chemical reactions that
remove oxygen, sulfates, (5) and remove other chemicals
from the water. Once the superheated water (up to 750°F)
rises through vents in the ocean floor, additional
reactions cause minerals and compounds to precipitate
onto the seafloor, where bacteria feed on them Loihi shrimp—originally thought to exist only
around an undersea volcano near (5) Hawaii, survive by
using tiny, shear-like claws to harvest rapidly growing
bacterial filaments covering rocks near NW Rota-1’s
hydrothermal vents. The Loihi shrimp spend most of
their time grazing on the bacteria and evading another,
previously unknown, species of shrimp. Shrimp of that
species also graze on bacterial filaments as juveniles,
(7) resulting from their ability to cope with the noxious
environment around the volcano. They feed on the Loihi
shrimp and other organisms that are overcome by the
toxic plumes of volcanic gas and ash.
During an underwater eruption, steam quickly
(8) condenses. The steam leaves only carbon dioxide
bubbles and droplets of molten sulfur. This means that
the water near NW Rota-1 is more acidic than (9) that of
stomach acid, presenting yet another challenge to
life-forms living nearby. As the carbon dioxide level in
Earth’s atmosphere rises, the (10) worlds’ ocean’s absorb
more carbon 11 dioxide. Organisms flourishing near the
volcano may help biologists understand how life adjusts
to very acidic conditions. In addition, NW Rota-1 is a
natural laboratory where scientists can study conditions
that may be similar to those that gave rise to life on Earth
and perhaps even other worlds

Questions 1-11 are based on the following passage.
Survival in the Hostile Environment of NW Rota-1
[1] Sixty miles north of Guam and more than
1,700 feet under the ocean’s surface is the summit of
NW Rota-1, an undersea volcano discovered in 2003.
[2] Surprisingly, the volcano appears to have been
continuously active; it even grew 130 feet in height
between 2006 and 2009. [3] Yet despite the hostile
environment created by the constant volcanic activity, life
is thriving there. [4] Special adaptations are the key to
survival. [5] At that depth, water pressure suppresses the
explosive force of the volcano’s eruptions, allowing
scientists to (1) watch and observe them up close via remotely operated vehicles.(2)

NW Rota-1 is far below the ocean’s photic zone
where sunlight drives photosynthesis; (3) nevertheless,
bacteria supporting a unique food web have adapted to
this perpetually dark environment. The bacteria have
evolved to use hydrogen sulfide instead of sunlight for
the energy that drives their metabolic processes, and
hydrothermal venting is the source of the chemical soup
necessary to support (4) him or her. Seawater seeping
into fissures in the ocean floor is heated by underlying
magma, and the heat drives chemical reactions that
remove oxygen, sulfates, (5) and remove other chemicals
from the water. Once the superheated water (up to 750°F)
rises through vents in the ocean floor, additional
reactions cause minerals and compounds to precipitate
onto the seafloor, where bacteria feed on them Loihi shrimp—originally thought to exist only
around an undersea volcano near (5) Hawaii, survive by
using tiny, shear-like claws to harvest rapidly growing
bacterial filaments covering rocks near NW Rota-1’s
hydrothermal vents. The Loihi shrimp spend most of
their time grazing on the bacteria and evading another,
previously unknown, species of shrimp. Shrimp of that
species also graze on bacterial filaments as juveniles,
(7) resulting from their ability to cope with the noxious
environment around the volcano. They feed on the Loihi
shrimp and other organisms that are overcome by the
toxic plumes of volcanic gas and ash.
During an underwater eruption, steam quickly
(8) condenses. The steam leaves only carbon dioxide
bubbles and droplets of molten sulfur. This means that
the water near NW Rota-1 is more acidic than (9) that of
stomach acid, presenting yet another challenge to
life-forms living nearby. As the carbon dioxide level in
Earth’s atmosphere rises, the (10) worlds’ ocean’s absorb
more carbon 11 dioxide. Organisms flourishing near the
volcano may help biologists understand how life adjusts
to very acidic conditions. In addition, NW Rota-1 is a
natural laboratory where scientists can study conditions
that may be similar to those that gave rise to life on Earth
and perhaps even other worlds

Questions 1-11 are based on the following passage.
Survival in the Hostile Environment of NW Rota-1
[1] Sixty miles north of Guam and more than
1,700 feet under the ocean’s surface is the summit of
NW Rota-1, an undersea volcano discovered in 2003.
[2] Surprisingly, the volcano appears to have been
continuously active; it even grew 130 feet in height
between 2006 and 2009. [3] Yet despite the hostile
environment created by the constant volcanic activity, life
is thriving there. [4] Special adaptations are the key to
survival. [5] At that depth, water pressure suppresses the
explosive force of the volcano’s eruptions, allowing
scientists to (1) watch and observe them up close via remotely operated vehicles.(2)

NW Rota-1 is far below the ocean’s photic zone
where sunlight drives photosynthesis; (3) nevertheless,
bacteria supporting a unique food web have adapted to
this perpetually dark environment. The bacteria have
evolved to use hydrogen sulfide instead of sunlight for
the energy that drives their metabolic processes, and
hydrothermal venting is the source of the chemical soup
necessary to support (4) him or her. Seawater seeping
into fissures in the ocean floor is heated by underlying
magma, and the heat drives chemical reactions that
remove oxygen, sulfates, (5) and remove other chemicals
from the water. Once the superheated water (up to 750°F)
rises through vents in the ocean floor, additional
reactions cause minerals and compounds to precipitate
onto the seafloor, where bacteria feed on them Loihi shrimp—originally thought to exist only
around an undersea volcano near (5) Hawaii, survive by
using tiny, shear-like claws to harvest rapidly growing
bacterial filaments covering rocks near NW Rota-1’s
hydrothermal vents. The Loihi shrimp spend most of
their time grazing on the bacteria and evading another,
previously unknown, species of shrimp. Shrimp of that
species also graze on bacterial filaments as juveniles,
(7) resulting from their ability to cope with the noxious
environment around the volcano. They feed on the Loihi
shrimp and other organisms that are overcome by the
toxic plumes of volcanic gas and ash.
During an underwater eruption, steam quickly
(8) condenses. The steam leaves only carbon dioxide
bubbles and droplets of molten sulfur. This means that
the water near NW Rota-1 is more acidic than (9) that of
stomach acid, presenting yet another challenge to
life-forms living nearby. As the carbon dioxide level in
Earth’s atmosphere rises, the (10) worlds’ ocean’s absorb
more carbon 11 dioxide. Organisms flourishing near the
volcano may help biologists understand how life adjusts
to very acidic conditions. In addition, NW Rota-1 is a
natural laboratory where scientists can study conditions
that may be similar to those that gave rise to life on Earth
and perhaps even other worlds

Questions 1-11 are based on the following passage.
Survival in the Hostile Environment of NW Rota-1
[1] Sixty miles north of Guam and more than
1,700 feet under the ocean’s surface is the summit of
NW Rota-1, an undersea volcano discovered in 2003.
[2] Surprisingly, the volcano appears to have been
continuously active; it even grew 130 feet in height
between 2006 and 2009. [3] Yet despite the hostile
environment created by the constant volcanic activity, life
is thriving there. [4] Special adaptations are the key to
survival. [5] At that depth, water pressure suppresses the
explosive force of the volcano’s eruptions, allowing
scientists to (1) watch and observe them up close via remotely operated vehicles.(2)

NW Rota-1 is far below the ocean’s photic zone
where sunlight drives photosynthesis; (3) nevertheless,
bacteria supporting a unique food web have adapted to
this perpetually dark environment. The bacteria have
evolved to use hydrogen sulfide instead of sunlight for
the energy that drives their metabolic processes, and
hydrothermal venting is the source of the chemical soup
necessary to support (4) him or her. Seawater seeping
into fissures in the ocean floor is heated by underlying
magma, and the heat drives chemical reactions that
remove oxygen, sulfates, (5) and remove other chemicals
from the water. Once the superheated water (up to 750°F)
rises through vents in the ocean floor, additional
reactions cause minerals and compounds to precipitate
onto the seafloor, where bacteria feed on them Loihi shrimp—originally thought to exist only
around an undersea volcano near (5) Hawaii, survive by
using tiny, shear-like claws to harvest rapidly growing
bacterial filaments covering rocks near NW Rota-1’s
hydrothermal vents. The Loihi shrimp spend most of
their time grazing on the bacteria and evading another,
previously unknown, species of shrimp. Shrimp of that
species also graze on bacterial filaments as juveniles,
(7) resulting from their ability to cope with the noxious
environment around the volcano. They feed on the Loihi
shrimp and other organisms that are overcome by the
toxic plumes of volcanic gas and ash.
During an underwater eruption, steam quickly
(8) condenses. The steam leaves only carbon dioxide
bubbles and droplets of molten sulfur. This means that
the water near NW Rota-1 is more acidic than (9) that of
stomach acid, presenting yet another challenge to
life-forms living nearby. As the carbon dioxide level in
Earth’s atmosphere rises, the (10) worlds’ ocean’s absorb
more carbon 11 dioxide. Organisms flourishing near the
volcano may help biologists understand how life adjusts
to very acidic conditions. In addition, NW Rota-1 is a
natural laboratory where scientists can study conditions
that may be similar to those that gave rise to life on Earth
and perhaps even other worlds

Questions 1-11 are based on the following passage.
Survival in the Hostile Environment of NW Rota-1
[1] Sixty miles north of Guam and more than
1,700 feet under the ocean’s surface is the summit of
NW Rota-1, an undersea volcano discovered in 2003.
[2] Surprisingly, the volcano appears to have been
continuously active; it even grew 130 feet in height
between 2006 and 2009. [3] Yet despite the hostile
environment created by the constant volcanic activity, life
is thriving there. [4] Special adaptations are the key to
survival. [5] At that depth, water pressure suppresses the
explosive force of the volcano’s eruptions, allowing
scientists to (1) watch and observe them up close via remotely operated vehicles.(2)

NW Rota-1 is far below the ocean’s photic zone
where sunlight drives photosynthesis; (3) nevertheless,
bacteria supporting a unique food web have adapted to
this perpetually dark environment. The bacteria have
evolved to use hydrogen sulfide instead of sunlight for
the energy that drives their metabolic processes, and
hydrothermal venting is the source of the chemical soup
necessary to support (4) him or her. Seawater seeping
into fissures in the ocean floor is heated by underlying
magma, and the heat drives chemical reactions that
remove oxygen, sulfates, (5) and remove other chemicals
from the water. Once the superheated water (up to 750°F)
rises through vents in the ocean floor, additional
reactions cause minerals and compounds to precipitate
onto the seafloor, where bacteria feed on them Loihi shrimp—originally thought to exist only
around an undersea volcano near (5) Hawaii, survive by
using tiny, shear-like claws to harvest rapidly growing
bacterial filaments covering rocks near NW Rota-1’s
hydrothermal vents. The Loihi shrimp spend most of
their time grazing on the bacteria and evading another,
previously unknown, species of shrimp. Shrimp of that
species also graze on bacterial filaments as juveniles,
(7) resulting from their ability to cope with the noxious
environment around the volcano. They feed on the Loihi
shrimp and other organisms that are overcome by the
toxic plumes of volcanic gas and ash.
During an underwater eruption, steam quickly
(8) condenses. The steam leaves only carbon dioxide
bubbles and droplets of molten sulfur. This means that
the water near NW Rota-1 is more acidic than (9) that of
stomach acid, presenting yet another challenge to
life-forms living nearby. As the carbon dioxide level in
Earth’s atmosphere rises, the (10) worlds’ ocean’s absorb
more carbon 11 dioxide. Organisms flourishing near the
volcano may help biologists understand how life adjusts
to very acidic conditions. In addition, NW Rota-1 is a
natural laboratory where scientists can study conditions
that may be similar to those that gave rise to life on Earth
and perhaps even other worlds

Questions 1-11 are based on the following passage.
Survival in the Hostile Environment of NW Rota-1
[1] Sixty miles north of Guam and more than
1,700 feet under the ocean’s surface is the summit of
NW Rota-1, an undersea volcano discovered in 2003.
[2] Surprisingly, the volcano appears to have been
continuously active; it even grew 130 feet in height
between 2006 and 2009. [3] Yet despite the hostile
environment created by the constant volcanic activity, life
is thriving there. [4] Special adaptations are the key to
survival. [5] At that depth, water pressure suppresses the
explosive force of the volcano’s eruptions, allowing
scientists to (1) watch and observe them up close via remotely operated vehicles.(2)

NW Rota-1 is far below the ocean’s photic zone
where sunlight drives photosynthesis; (3) nevertheless,
bacteria supporting a unique food web have adapted to
this perpetually dark environment. The bacteria have
evolved to use hydrogen sulfide instead of sunlight for
the energy that drives their metabolic processes, and
hydrothermal venting is the source of the chemical soup
necessary to support (4) him or her. Seawater seeping
into fissures in the ocean floor is heated by underlying
magma, and the heat drives chemical reactions that
remove oxygen, sulfates, (5) and remove other chemicals
from the water. Once the superheated water (up to 750°F)
rises through vents in the ocean floor, additional
reactions cause minerals and compounds to precipitate
onto the seafloor, where bacteria feed on them Loihi shrimp—originally thought to exist only
around an undersea volcano near (5) Hawaii, survive by
using tiny, shear-like claws to harvest rapidly growing
bacterial filaments covering rocks near NW Rota-1’s
hydrothermal vents. The Loihi shrimp spend most of
their time grazing on the bacteria and evading another,
previously unknown, species of shrimp. Shrimp of that
species also graze on bacterial filaments as juveniles,
(7) resulting from their ability to cope with the noxious
environment around the volcano. They feed on the Loihi
shrimp and other organisms that are overcome by the
toxic plumes of volcanic gas and ash.
During an underwater eruption, steam quickly
(8) condenses. The steam leaves only carbon dioxide
bubbles and droplets of molten sulfur. This means that
the water near NW Rota-1 is more acidic than (9) that of
stomach acid, presenting yet another challenge to
life-forms living nearby. As the carbon dioxide level in
Earth’s atmosphere rises, the (10) worlds’ ocean’s absorb
more carbon 11 dioxide. Organisms flourishing near the
volcano may help biologists understand how life adjusts
to very acidic conditions. In addition, NW Rota-1 is a
natural laboratory where scientists can study conditions
that may be similar to those that gave rise to life on Earth
and perhaps even other worlds

Questions 1-11 are based on the following passage.
Survival in the Hostile Environment of NW Rota-1
[1] Sixty miles north of Guam and more than
1,700 feet under the ocean’s surface is the summit of
NW Rota-1, an undersea volcano discovered in 2003.
[2] Surprisingly, the volcano appears to have been
continuously active; it even grew 130 feet in height
between 2006 and 2009. [3] Yet despite the hostile
environment created by the constant volcanic activity, life
is thriving there. [4] Special adaptations are the key to
survival. [5] At that depth, water pressure suppresses the
explosive force of the volcano’s eruptions, allowing
scientists to (1) watch and observe them up close via remotely operated vehicles.(2)

NW Rota-1 is far below the ocean’s photic zone
where sunlight drives photosynthesis; (3) nevertheless,
bacteria supporting a unique food web have adapted to
this perpetually dark environment. The bacteria have
evolved to use hydrogen sulfide instead of sunlight for
the energy that drives their metabolic processes, and
hydrothermal venting is the source of the chemical soup
necessary to support (4) him or her. Seawater seeping
into fissures in the ocean floor is heated by underlying
magma, and the heat drives chemical reactions that
remove oxygen, sulfates, (5) and remove other chemicals
from the water. Once the superheated water (up to 750°F)
rises through vents in the ocean floor, additional
reactions cause minerals and compounds to precipitate
onto the seafloor, where bacteria feed on them Loihi shrimp—originally thought to exist only
around an undersea volcano near (5) Hawaii, survive by
using tiny, shear-like claws to harvest rapidly growing
bacterial filaments covering rocks near NW Rota-1’s
hydrothermal vents. The Loihi shrimp spend most of
their time grazing on the bacteria and evading another,
previously unknown, species of shrimp. Shrimp of that
species also graze on bacterial filaments as juveniles,
(7) resulting from their ability to cope with the noxious
environment around the volcano. They feed on the Loihi
shrimp and other organisms that are overcome by the
toxic plumes of volcanic gas and ash.
During an underwater eruption, steam quickly
(8) condenses. The steam leaves only carbon dioxide
bubbles and droplets of molten sulfur. This means that
the water near NW Rota-1 is more acidic than (9) that of
stomach acid, presenting yet another challenge to
life-forms living nearby. As the carbon dioxide level in
Earth’s atmosphere rises, the (10) worlds’ ocean’s absorb
more carbon 11 dioxide. Organisms flourishing near the
volcano may help biologists understand how life adjusts
to very acidic conditions. In addition, NW Rota-1 is a
natural laboratory where scientists can study conditions
that may be similar to those that gave rise to life on Earth
and perhaps even other worlds

Questions 1-11 are based on the following passage.
Survival in the Hostile Environment of NW Rota-1
[1] Sixty miles north of Guam and more than
1,700 feet under the ocean’s surface is the summit of
NW Rota-1, an undersea volcano discovered in 2003.
[2] Surprisingly, the volcano appears to have been
continuously active; it even grew 130 feet in height
between 2006 and 2009. [3] Yet despite the hostile
environment created by the constant volcanic activity, life
is thriving there. [4] Special adaptations are the key to
survival. [5] At that depth, water pressure suppresses the
explosive force of the volcano’s eruptions, allowing
scientists to (1) watch and observe them up close via remotely operated vehicles.(2)

NW Rota-1 is far below the ocean’s photic zone
where sunlight drives photosynthesis; (3) nevertheless,
bacteria supporting a unique food web have adapted to
this perpetually dark environment. The bacteria have
evolved to use hydrogen sulfide instead of sunlight for
the energy that drives their metabolic processes, and
hydrothermal venting is the source of the chemical soup
necessary to support (4) him or her. Seawater seeping
into fissures in the ocean floor is heated by underlying
magma, and the heat drives chemical reactions that
remove oxygen, sulfates, (5) and remove other chemicals
from the water. Once the superheated water (up to 750°F)
rises through vents in the ocean floor, additional
reactions cause minerals and compounds to precipitate
onto the seafloor, where bacteria feed on them Loihi shrimp—originally thought to exist only
around an undersea volcano near (5) Hawaii, survive by
using tiny, shear-like claws to harvest rapidly growing
bacterial filaments covering rocks near NW Rota-1’s
hydrothermal vents. The Loihi shrimp spend most of
their time grazing on the bacteria and evading another,
previously unknown, species of shrimp. Shrimp of that
species also graze on bacterial filaments as juveniles,
(7) resulting from their ability to cope with the noxious
environment around the volcano. They feed on the Loihi
shrimp and other organisms that are overcome by the
toxic plumes of volcanic gas and ash.
During an underwater eruption, steam quickly
(8) condenses. The steam leaves only carbon dioxide
bubbles and droplets of molten sulfur. This means that
the water near NW Rota-1 is more acidic than (9) that of
stomach acid, presenting yet another challenge to
life-forms living nearby. As the carbon dioxide level in
Earth’s atmosphere rises, the (10) worlds’ ocean’s absorb
more carbon 11 dioxide. Organisms flourishing near the
volcano may help biologists understand how life adjusts
to very acidic conditions. In addition, NW Rota-1 is a
natural laboratory where scientists can study conditions
that may be similar to those that gave rise to life on Earth
and perhaps even other worlds

Questions 1-11 are based on the following passage.
Survival in the Hostile Environment of NW Rota-1
[1] Sixty miles north of Guam and more than
1,700 feet under the ocean’s surface is the summit of
NW Rota-1, an undersea volcano discovered in 2003.
[2] Surprisingly, the volcano appears to have been
continuously active; it even grew 130 feet in height
between 2006 and 2009. [3] Yet despite the hostile
environment created by the constant volcanic activity, life
is thriving there. [4] Special adaptations are the key to
survival. [5] At that depth, water pressure suppresses the
explosive force of the volcano’s eruptions, allowing
scientists to (1) watch and observe them up close via remotely operated vehicles.(2)

NW Rota-1 is far below the ocean’s photic zone
where sunlight drives photosynthesis; (3) nevertheless,
bacteria supporting a unique food web have adapted to
this perpetually dark environment. The bacteria have
evolved to use hydrogen sulfide instead of sunlight for
the energy that drives their metabolic processes, and
hydrothermal venting is the source of the chemical soup
necessary to support (4) him or her. Seawater seeping
into fissures in the ocean floor is heated by underlying
magma, and the heat drives chemical reactions that
remove oxygen, sulfates, (5) and remove other chemicals
from the water. Once the superheated water (up to 750°F)
rises through vents in the ocean floor, additional
reactions cause minerals and compounds to precipitate
onto the seafloor, where bacteria feed on them Loihi shrimp—originally thought to exist only
around an undersea volcano near (5) Hawaii, survive by
using tiny, shear-like claws to harvest rapidly growing
bacterial filaments covering rocks near NW Rota-1’s
hydrothermal vents. The Loihi shrimp spend most of
their time grazing on the bacteria and evading another,
previously unknown, species of shrimp. Shrimp of that
species also graze on bacterial filaments as juveniles,
(7) resulting from their ability to cope with the noxious
environment around the volcano. They feed on the Loihi
shrimp and other organisms that are overcome by the
toxic plumes of volcanic gas and ash.
During an underwater eruption, steam quickly
(8) condenses. The steam leaves only carbon dioxide
bubbles and droplets of molten sulfur. This means that
the water near NW Rota-1 is more acidic than (9) that of
stomach acid, presenting yet another challenge to
life-forms living nearby. As the carbon dioxide level in
Earth’s atmosphere rises, the (10) worlds’ ocean’s absorb
more carbon 11 dioxide. Organisms flourishing near the
volcano may help biologists understand how life adjusts
to very acidic conditions. In addition, NW Rota-1 is a
natural laboratory where scientists can study conditions
that may be similar to those that gave rise to life on Earth
and perhaps even other worlds

Questions 12-22 are based on the following passage
and supplementary material.
Free Public Transportation
City planners, concerned about vehicle traffic
clogging their cities’ roadways, are trying to find ways to
get people out of their cars and onto buses and trains.
One radical proposal some planners have considered is to
make public transportation free to passengers. While
fare-free policies do increase (12) ridership, but they have
not been found to be an effective way to address traffic
problems. Moreover, these policies may result in serious
budget shortfalls.
Not surprisingly, (13) public transportation is used
by more people when people do not have to pay a fare.
According to a report by the Center for Urban
Transportation Research, public transit systems that
abolish fares typically see a short-term increase in
ridership of about 50 percent. However, this increase
does not necessarily correlate with a decrease in car
traffic. Evidence suggests that when buses and subways
are free, people often take bus and train trips they would
not have taken otherwise while still using their cars
nearly as much as they did before. In 2013 Tallinn,
Estonia, instituted fare-free rides for city residents
(becoming the largest city in the world to do so), but car
use in Tallinn has only slightly (14 )declined; as a 2014
study by the KTH Royal Institute of Technology in
Sweden found that car traffic in Tallinn was down less
than 3 percent since (15) it was enacted.
Instituting a fare-free system (16) can also have a
devastating effect on a city’s transportation budget. All
public transportation systems are subsidized by the
government to some extent, but large systems gain a
substantial portion of their operating revenue from fares.
Since systems that go fare-free see increases in ridership,
they often must operate more buses and trains and hire
more drivers and other personnel at the same time that
they are losing a key source of funding. Advocates of
fare-free policies claim that the costs of these policies are
largely offset by various (17) savings, however, a recent
study comparing projected results of fare-free policies in
different cities found this outlook to be (18) way too
sunny. For example, in San Francisco, CA, fare-free  
public transit was projected to save $8.4 million per year
in fare collection costs (19) but create a deficit of $72
million per year in lost fares, on top of capital
investments in new equipment and infrastructure.( 20)
Adapted from Transportation Research Board, “Implementation and
Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems.” ©2012 by Transportation
Research Board.
This is not to say that fare-free public transportation
is always a bad idea. Some college towns and resort
communities embrace the model because buses can go
faster when drivers (21) would not have had to collect
fares. For large cities looking to reduce automobile traffic,
though, (22) research about Tallinn, Estonia, could be
instructive.

Questions 12-22 are based on the following passage
and supplementary material.
Free Public Transportation
City planners, concerned about vehicle traffic
clogging their cities’ roadways, are trying to find ways to
get people out of their cars and onto buses and trains.
One radical proposal some planners have considered is to
make public transportation free to passengers. While
fare-free policies do increase (12) ridership, but they have
not been found to be an effective way to address traffic
problems. Moreover, these policies may result in serious
budget shortfalls.
Not surprisingly, (13) public transportation is used
by more people when people do not have to pay a fare.
According to a report by the Center for Urban
Transportation Research, public transit systems that
abolish fares typically see a short-term increase in
ridership of about 50 percent. However, this increase
does not necessarily correlate with a decrease in car
traffic. Evidence suggests that when buses and subways
are free, people often take bus and train trips they would
not have taken otherwise while still using their cars
nearly as much as they did before. In 2013 Tallinn,
Estonia, instituted fare-free rides for city residents
(becoming the largest city in the world to do so), but car
use in Tallinn has only slightly (14 )declined; as a 2014
study by the KTH Royal Institute of Technology in
Sweden found that car traffic in Tallinn was down less
than 3 percent since (15) it was enacted.
Instituting a fare-free system (16) can also have a
devastating effect on a city’s transportation budget. All
public transportation systems are subsidized by the
government to some extent, but large systems gain a
substantial portion of their operating revenue from fares.
Since systems that go fare-free see increases in ridership,
they often must operate more buses and trains and hire
more drivers and other personnel at the same time that
they are losing a key source of funding. Advocates of
fare-free policies claim that the costs of these policies are
largely offset by various (17) savings, however, a recent
study comparing projected results of fare-free policies in
different cities found this outlook to be (18) way too
sunny. For example, in San Francisco, CA, fare-free  
public transit was projected to save $8.4 million per year
in fare collection costs (19) but create a deficit of $72
million per year in lost fares, on top of capital
investments in new equipment and infrastructure.( 20)
Adapted from Transportation Research Board, “Implementation and
Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems.” ©2012 by Transportation
Research Board.
This is not to say that fare-free public transportation
is always a bad idea. Some college towns and resort
communities embrace the model because buses can go
faster when drivers (21) would not have had to collect
fares. For large cities looking to reduce automobile traffic,
though, (22) research about Tallinn, Estonia, could be
instructive.

Questions 12-22 are based on the following passage
and supplementary material.
Free Public Transportation
City planners, concerned about vehicle traffic
clogging their cities’ roadways, are trying to find ways to
get people out of their cars and onto buses and trains.
One radical proposal some planners have considered is to
make public transportation free to passengers. While
fare-free policies do increase (12) ridership, but they have
not been found to be an effective way to address traffic
problems. Moreover, these policies may result in serious
budget shortfalls.
Not surprisingly, (13) public transportation is used
by more people when people do not have to pay a fare.
According to a report by the Center for Urban
Transportation Research, public transit systems that
abolish fares typically see a short-term increase in
ridership of about 50 percent. However, this increase
does not necessarily correlate with a decrease in car
traffic. Evidence suggests that when buses and subways
are free, people often take bus and train trips they would
not have taken otherwise while still using their cars
nearly as much as they did before. In 2013 Tallinn,
Estonia, instituted fare-free rides for city residents
(becoming the largest city in the world to do so), but car
use in Tallinn has only slightly (14 )declined; as a 2014
study by the KTH Royal Institute of Technology in
Sweden found that car traffic in Tallinn was down less
than 3 percent since (15) it was enacted.
Instituting a fare-free system (16) can also have a
devastating effect on a city’s transportation budget. All
public transportation systems are subsidized by the
government to some extent, but large systems gain a
substantial portion of their operating revenue from fares.
Since systems that go fare-free see increases in ridership,
they often must operate more buses and trains and hire
more drivers and other personnel at the same time that
they are losing a key source of funding. Advocates of
fare-free policies claim that the costs of these policies are
largely offset by various (17) savings, however, a recent
study comparing projected results of fare-free policies in
different cities found this outlook to be (18) way too
sunny. For example, in San Francisco, CA, fare-free  
public transit was projected to save $8.4 million per year
in fare collection costs (19) but create a deficit of $72
million per year in lost fares, on top of capital
investments in new equipment and infrastructure.( 20)
Adapted from Transportation Research Board, “Implementation and
Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems.” ©2012 by Transportation
Research Board.
This is not to say that fare-free public transportation
is always a bad idea. Some college towns and resort
communities embrace the model because buses can go
faster when drivers (21) would not have had to collect
fares. For large cities looking to reduce automobile traffic,
though, (22) research about Tallinn, Estonia, could be
instructive.

Questions 12-22 are based on the following passage
and supplementary material.
Free Public Transportation
City planners, concerned about vehicle traffic
clogging their cities’ roadways, are trying to find ways to
get people out of their cars and onto buses and trains.
One radical proposal some planners have considered is to
make public transportation free to passengers. While
fare-free policies do increase (12) ridership, but they have
not been found to be an effective way to address traffic
problems. Moreover, these policies may result in serious
budget shortfalls.
Not surprisingly, (13) public transportation is used
by more people when people do not have to pay a fare.
According to a report by the Center for Urban
Transportation Research, public transit systems that
abolish fares typically see a short-term increase in
ridership of about 50 percent. However, this increase
does not necessarily correlate with a decrease in car
traffic. Evidence suggests that when buses and subways
are free, people often take bus and train trips they would
not have taken otherwise while still using their cars
nearly as much as they did before. In 2013 Tallinn,
Estonia, instituted fare-free rides for city residents
(becoming the largest city in the world to do so), but car
use in Tallinn has only slightly (14 )declined; as a 2014
study by the KTH Royal Institute of Technology in
Sweden found that car traffic in Tallinn was down less
than 3 percent since (15) it was enacted.
Instituting a fare-free system (16) can also have a
devastating effect on a city’s transportation budget. All
public transportation systems are subsidized by the
government to some extent, but large systems gain a
substantial portion of their operating revenue from fares.
Since systems that go fare-free see increases in ridership,
they often must operate more buses and trains and hire
more drivers and other personnel at the same time that
they are losing a key source of funding. Advocates of
fare-free policies claim that the costs of these policies are
largely offset by various (17) savings, however, a recent
study comparing projected results of fare-free policies in
different cities found this outlook to be (18) way too
sunny. For example, in San Francisco, CA, fare-free  
public transit was projected to save $8.4 million per year
in fare collection costs (19) but create a deficit of $72
million per year in lost fares, on top of capital
investments in new equipment and infrastructure.( 20)
Adapted from Transportation Research Board, “Implementation and
Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems.” ©2012 by Transportation
Research Board.
This is not to say that fare-free public transportation
is always a bad idea. Some college towns and resort
communities embrace the model because buses can go
faster when drivers (21) would not have had to collect
fares. For large cities looking to reduce automobile traffic,
though, (22) research about Tallinn, Estonia, could be
instructive.

Questions 12-22 are based on the following passage
and supplementary material.
Free Public Transportation
City planners, concerned about vehicle traffic
clogging their cities’ roadways, are trying to find ways to
get people out of their cars and onto buses and trains.
One radical proposal some planners have considered is to
make public transportation free to passengers. While
fare-free policies do increase (12) ridership, but they have
not been found to be an effective way to address traffic
problems. Moreover, these policies may result in serious
budget shortfalls.
Not surprisingly, (13) public transportation is used
by more people when people do not have to pay a fare.
According to a report by the Center for Urban
Transportation Research, public transit systems that
abolish fares typically see a short-term increase in
ridership of about 50 percent. However, this increase
does not necessarily correlate with a decrease in car
traffic. Evidence suggests that when buses and subways
are free, people often take bus and train trips they would
not have taken otherwise while still using their cars
nearly as much as they did before. In 2013 Tallinn,
Estonia, instituted fare-free rides for city residents
(becoming the largest city in the world to do so), but car
use in Tallinn has only slightly (14 )declined; as a 2014
study by the KTH Royal Institute of Technology in
Sweden found that car traffic in Tallinn was down less
than 3 percent since (15) it was enacted.
Instituting a fare-free system (16) can also have a
devastating effect on a city’s transportation budget. All
public transportation systems are subsidized by the
government to some extent, but large systems gain a
substantial portion of their operating revenue from fares.
Since systems that go fare-free see increases in ridership,
they often must operate more buses and trains and hire
more drivers and other personnel at the same time that
they are losing a key source of funding. Advocates of
fare-free policies claim that the costs of these policies are
largely offset by various (17) savings, however, a recent
study comparing projected results of fare-free policies in
different cities found this outlook to be (18) way too
sunny. For example, in San Francisco, CA, fare-free  
public transit was projected to save $8.4 million per year
in fare collection costs (19) but create a deficit of $72
million per year in lost fares, on top of capital
investments in new equipment and infrastructure.( 20)
Adapted from Transportation Research Board, “Implementation and
Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems.” ©2012 by Transportation
Research Board.
This is not to say that fare-free public transportation
is always a bad idea. Some college towns and resort
communities embrace the model because buses can go
faster when drivers (21) would not have had to collect
fares. For large cities looking to reduce automobile traffic,
though, (22) research about Tallinn, Estonia, could be
instructive.

Questions 12-22 are based on the following passage
and supplementary material.
Free Public Transportation
City planners, concerned about vehicle traffic
clogging their cities’ roadways, are trying to find ways to
get people out of their cars and onto buses and trains.
One radical proposal some planners have considered is to
make public transportation free to passengers. While
fare-free policies do increase (12) ridership, but they have
not been found to be an effective way to address traffic
problems. Moreover, these policies may result in serious
budget shortfalls.
Not surprisingly, (13) public transportation is used
by more people when people do not have to pay a fare.
According to a report by the Center for Urban
Transportation Research, public transit systems that
abolish fares typically see a short-term increase in
ridership of about 50 percent. However, this increase
does not necessarily correlate with a decrease in car
traffic. Evidence suggests that when buses and subways
are free, people often take bus and train trips they would
not have taken otherwise while still using their cars
nearly as much as they did before. In 2013 Tallinn,
Estonia, instituted fare-free rides for city residents
(becoming the largest city in the world to do so), but car
use in Tallinn has only slightly (14 )declined; as a 2014
study by the KTH Royal Institute of Technology in
Sweden found that car traffic in Tallinn was down less
than 3 percent since (15) it was enacted.
Instituting a fare-free system (16) can also have a
devastating effect on a city’s transportation budget. All
public transportation systems are subsidized by the
government to some extent, but large systems gain a
substantial portion of their operating revenue from fares.
Since systems that go fare-free see increases in ridership,
they often must operate more buses and trains and hire
more drivers and other personnel at the same time that
they are losing a key source of funding. Advocates of
fare-free policies claim that the costs of these policies are
largely offset by various (17) savings, however, a recent
study comparing projected results of fare-free policies in
different cities found this outlook to be (18) way too
sunny. For example, in San Francisco, CA, fare-free  
public transit was projected to save $8.4 million per year
in fare collection costs (19) but create a deficit of $72
million per year in lost fares, on top of capital
investments in new equipment and infrastructure.( 20)
Adapted from Transportation Research Board, “Implementation and
Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems.” ©2012 by Transportation
Research Board.
This is not to say that fare-free public transportation
is always a bad idea. Some college towns and resort
communities embrace the model because buses can go
faster when drivers (21) would not have had to collect
fares. For large cities looking to reduce automobile traffic,
though, (22) research about Tallinn, Estonia, could be
instructive.

Questions 12-22 are based on the following passage
and supplementary material.
Free Public Transportation
City planners, concerned about vehicle traffic
clogging their cities’ roadways, are trying to find ways to
get people out of their cars and onto buses and trains.
One radical proposal some planners have considered is to
make public transportation free to passengers. While
fare-free policies do increase (12) ridership, but they have
not been found to be an effective way to address traffic
problems. Moreover, these policies may result in serious
budget shortfalls.
Not surprisingly, (13) public transportation is used
by more people when people do not have to pay a fare.
According to a report by the Center for Urban
Transportation Research, public transit systems that
abolish fares typically see a short-term increase in
ridership of about 50 percent. However, this increase
does not necessarily correlate with a decrease in car
traffic. Evidence suggests that when buses and subways
are free, people often take bus and train trips they would
not have taken otherwise while still using their cars
nearly as much as they did before. In 2013 Tallinn,
Estonia, instituted fare-free rides for city residents
(becoming the largest city in the world to do so), but car
use in Tallinn has only slightly (14 )declined; as a 2014
study by the KTH Royal Institute of Technology in
Sweden found that car traffic in Tallinn was down less
than 3 percent since (15) it was enacted.
Instituting a fare-free system (16) can also have a
devastating effect on a city’s transportation budget. All
public transportation systems are subsidized by the
government to some extent, but large systems gain a
substantial portion of their operating revenue from fares.
Since systems that go fare-free see increases in ridership,
they often must operate more buses and trains and hire
more drivers and other personnel at the same time that
they are losing a key source of funding. Advocates of
fare-free policies claim that the costs of these policies are
largely offset by various (17) savings, however, a recent
study comparing projected results of fare-free policies in
different cities found this outlook to be (18) way too
sunny. For example, in San Francisco, CA, fare-free  
public transit was projected to save $8.4 million per year
in fare collection costs (19) but create a deficit of $72
million per year in lost fares, on top of capital
investments in new equipment and infrastructure.( 20)
Adapted from Transportation Research Board, “Implementation and
Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems.” ©2012 by Transportation
Research Board.
This is not to say that fare-free public transportation
is always a bad idea. Some college towns and resort
communities embrace the model because buses can go
faster when drivers (21) would not have had to collect
fares. For large cities looking to reduce automobile traffic,
though, (22) research about Tallinn, Estonia, could be
instructive.

Questions 12-22 are based on the following passage
and supplementary material.
Free Public Transportation
City planners, concerned about vehicle traffic
clogging their cities’ roadways, are trying to find ways to
get people out of their cars and onto buses and trains.
One radical proposal some planners have considered is to
make public transportation free to passengers. While
fare-free policies do increase (12) ridership, but they have
not been found to be an effective way to address traffic
problems. Moreover, these policies may result in serious
budget shortfalls.
Not surprisingly, (13) public transportation is used
by more people when people do not have to pay a fare.
According to a report by the Center for Urban
Transportation Research, public transit systems that
abolish fares typically see a short-term increase in
ridership of about 50 percent. However, this increase
does not necessarily correlate with a decrease in car
traffic. Evidence suggests that when buses and subways
are free, people often take bus and train trips they would
not have taken otherwise while still using their cars
nearly as much as they did before. In 2013 Tallinn,
Estonia, instituted fare-free rides for city residents
(becoming the largest city in the world to do so), but car
use in Tallinn has only slightly (14 )declined; as a 2014
study by the KTH Royal Institute of Technology in
Sweden found that car traffic in Tallinn was down less
than 3 percent since (15) it was enacted.
Instituting a fare-free system (16) can also have a
devastating effect on a city’s transportation budget. All
public transportation systems are subsidized by the
government to some extent, but large systems gain a
substantial portion of their operating revenue from fares.
Since systems that go fare-free see increases in ridership,
they often must operate more buses and trains and hire
more drivers and other personnel at the same time that
they are losing a key source of funding. Advocates of
fare-free policies claim that the costs of these policies are
largely offset by various (17) savings, however, a recent
study comparing projected results of fare-free policies in
different cities found this outlook to be (18) way too
sunny. For example, in San Francisco, CA, fare-free  
public transit was projected to save $8.4 million per year
in fare collection costs (19) but create a deficit of $72
million per year in lost fares, on top of capital
investments in new equipment and infrastructure.( 20)
Adapted from Transportation Research Board, “Implementation and
Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems.” ©2012 by Transportation
Research Board.
This is not to say that fare-free public transportation
is always a bad idea. Some college towns and resort
communities embrace the model because buses can go
faster when drivers (21) would not have had to collect
fares. For large cities looking to reduce automobile traffic,
though, (22) research about Tallinn, Estonia, could be
instructive.

Questions 12-22 are based on the following passage
and supplementary material.
Free Public Transportation
City planners, concerned about vehicle traffic
clogging their cities’ roadways, are trying to find ways to
get people out of their cars and onto buses and trains.
One radical proposal some planners have considered is to
make public transportation free to passengers. While
fare-free policies do increase (12) ridership, but they have
not been found to be an effective way to address traffic
problems. Moreover, these policies may result in serious
budget shortfalls.
Not surprisingly, (13) public transportation is used
by more people when people do not have to pay a fare.
According to a report by the Center for Urban
Transportation Research, public transit systems that
abolish fares typically see a short-term increase in
ridership of about 50 percent. However, this increase
does not necessarily correlate with a decrease in car
traffic. Evidence suggests that when buses and subways
are free, people often take bus and train trips they would
not have taken otherwise while still using their cars
nearly as much as they did before. In 2013 Tallinn,
Estonia, instituted fare-free rides for city residents
(becoming the largest city in the world to do so), but car
use in Tallinn has only slightly (14 )declined; as a 2014
study by the KTH Royal Institute of Technology in
Sweden found that car traffic in Tallinn was down less
than 3 percent since (15) it was enacted.
Instituting a fare-free system (16) can also have a
devastating effect on a city’s transportation budget. All
public transportation systems are subsidized by the
government to some extent, but large systems gain a
substantial portion of their operating revenue from fares.
Since systems that go fare-free see increases in ridership,
they often must operate more buses and trains and hire
more drivers and other personnel at the same time that
they are losing a key source of funding. Advocates of
fare-free policies claim that the costs of these policies are
largely offset by various (17) savings, however, a recent
study comparing projected results of fare-free policies in
different cities found this outlook to be (18) way too
sunny. For example, in San Francisco, CA, fare-free  
public transit was projected to save $8.4 million per year
in fare collection costs (19) but create a deficit of $72
million per year in lost fares, on top of capital
investments in new equipment and infrastructure.( 20)
Adapted from Transportation Research Board, “Implementation and
Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems.” ©2012 by Transportation
Research Board.
This is not to say that fare-free public transportation
is always a bad idea. Some college towns and resort
communities embrace the model because buses can go
faster when drivers (21) would not have had to collect
fares. For large cities looking to reduce automobile traffic,
though, (22) research about Tallinn, Estonia, could be
instructive.

Questions 12-22 are based on the following passage
and supplementary material.
Free Public Transportation
City planners, concerned about vehicle traffic
clogging their cities’ roadways, are trying to find ways to
get people out of their cars and onto buses and trains.
One radical proposal some planners have considered is to
make public transportation free to passengers. While
fare-free policies do increase (12) ridership, but they have
not been found to be an effective way to address traffic
problems. Moreover, these policies may result in serious
budget shortfalls.
Not surprisingly, (13) public transportation is used
by more people when people do not have to pay a fare.
According to a report by the Center for Urban
Transportation Research, public transit systems that
abolish fares typically see a short-term increase in
ridership of about 50 percent. However, this increase
does not necessarily correlate with a decrease in car
traffic. Evidence suggests that when buses and subways
are free, people often take bus and train trips they would
not have taken otherwise while still using their cars
nearly as much as they did before. In 2013 Tallinn,
Estonia, instituted fare-free rides for city residents
(becoming the largest city in the world to do so), but car
use in Tallinn has only slightly (14 )declined; as a 2014
study by the KTH Royal Institute of Technology in
Sweden found that car traffic in Tallinn was down less
than 3 percent since (15) it was enacted.
Instituting a fare-free system (16) can also have a
devastating effect on a city’s transportation budget. All
public transportation systems are subsidized by the
government to some extent, but large systems gain a
substantial portion of their operating revenue from fares.
Since systems that go fare-free see increases in ridership,
they often must operate more buses and trains and hire
more drivers and other personnel at the same time that
they are losing a key source of funding. Advocates of
fare-free policies claim that the costs of these policies are
largely offset by various (17) savings, however, a recent
study comparing projected results of fare-free policies in
different cities found this outlook to be (18) way too
sunny. For example, in San Francisco, CA, fare-free  
public transit was projected to save $8.4 million per year
in fare collection costs (19) but create a deficit of $72
million per year in lost fares, on top of capital
investments in new equipment and infrastructure.( 20)
Adapted from Transportation Research Board, “Implementation and
Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems.” ©2012 by Transportation
Research Board.
This is not to say that fare-free public transportation
is always a bad idea. Some college towns and resort
communities embrace the model because buses can go
faster when drivers (21) would not have had to collect
fares. For large cities looking to reduce automobile traffic,
though, (22) research about Tallinn, Estonia, could be
instructive.

Questions 12-22 are based on the following passage
and supplementary material.
Free Public Transportation
City planners, concerned about vehicle traffic
clogging their cities’ roadways, are trying to find ways to
get people out of their cars and onto buses and trains.
One radical proposal some planners have considered is to
make public transportation free to passengers. While
fare-free policies do increase (12) ridership, but they have
not been found to be an effective way to address traffic
problems. Moreover, these policies may result in serious
budget shortfalls.
Not surprisingly, (13) public transportation is used
by more people when people do not have to pay a fare.
According to a report by the Center for Urban
Transportation Research, public transit systems that
abolish fares typically see a short-term increase in
ridership of about 50 percent. However, this increase
does not necessarily correlate with a decrease in car
traffic. Evidence suggests that when buses and subways
are free, people often take bus and train trips they would
not have taken otherwise while still using their cars
nearly as much as they did before. In 2013 Tallinn,
Estonia, instituted fare-free rides for city residents
(becoming the largest city in the world to do so), but car
use in Tallinn has only slightly (14 )declined; as a 2014
study by the KTH Royal Institute of Technology in
Sweden found that car traffic in Tallinn was down less
than 3 percent since (15) it was enacted.
Instituting a fare-free system (16) can also have a
devastating effect on a city’s transportation budget. All
public transportation systems are subsidized by the
government to some extent, but large systems gain a
substantial portion of their operating revenue from fares.
Since systems that go fare-free see increases in ridership,
they often must operate more buses and trains and hire
more drivers and other personnel at the same time that
they are losing a key source of funding. Advocates of
fare-free policies claim that the costs of these policies are
largely offset by various (17) savings, however, a recent
study comparing projected results of fare-free policies in
different cities found this outlook to be (18) way too
sunny. For example, in San Francisco, CA, fare-free  
public transit was projected to save $8.4 million per year
in fare collection costs (19) but create a deficit of $72
million per year in lost fares, on top of capital
investments in new equipment and infrastructure.( 20)
Adapted from Transportation Research Board, “Implementation and
Outcomes of Fare-Free Transit Systems.” ©2012 by Transportation
Research Board.
This is not to say that fare-free public transportation
is always a bad idea. Some college towns and resort
communities embrace the model because buses can go
faster when drivers (21) would not have had to collect
fares. For large cities looking to reduce automobile traffic,
though, (22) research about Tallinn, Estonia, could be
instructive.

Questions 23-33 are based on the following passage.
Wet Plate Photography: An Old Technique Makes a
New Splash
[1] Upon the arrival of the digital camera,
professional photographers harrumphed that( 23 )they
produced ugly, low-resolution images. [2] Yet eventually
the vast majority of them traded film for megapixels.
[3] The latest digital cameras take pictures so crisp that
the images in them appear to be die-cut. [4] Even today’s
humblest smartphones snap bright, sharp photos. [5] A
few contemporary photographers, however, have
embraced an anachronistic method that was state-ofthe-art technology when it was invented in 1851: wet
plate photography. (24)
Wet plate photographers essentially create their own
film. The process can be dangerous, given that it requires
the use of several volatile chemicals. (25) To take a wet
plate photograph, photographers usually first arrange or
pose (26) it’s subjects before mixing collodion (a viscous,
light-sensitive chemical solution) with bromide, iodide,
or chloride and applying the mixture to a clean, polished
glass plate. Dried collodion is unusable, (27) so once the
photo is snapped with a massive, tripod-mounted
camera, the photographer has (28) nominal minutes to
develop it, using more chemicals. When the image
appears in the negative, water is used to stop the process.
A chemical “fix bath” turns the negative image into a
positive one. The photo is then immersed in water and
warmed. (29) In conclusion, it is coated with lavender
(30 )oil to give it (a protective finish).
Wet plate photos are marvelously fine-grained and
detailed, and they seem to glow with an ethereal silvery
light. One misstep or a speck of dust on the glass plate,
though, and flaws appear. Smudges resembling oyster
shells (31) swirl around the photos’ edges. Sunbursts or
streaks emerge where collodion pools unevenly. Since the
film requires long exposures, moving subjects blur. (32) A
shifting arm or leg might even disappear because of the
lengthy exposure time required. The exposure time
required explains why people in wet plate photographs
often look dour: it’s hard to hold a smile for that long.
Prominent among contemporary wet plate
photographers is Joni Sternbach, whose work centers,
appropriately, on water and people’s relationship to it.
Sternbach’s photo series Ocean Details, Sea/Sky, and
SurfLand depict surging surfs, roiling waves, and the
surfers who ride them. (33 )Her subjects could be
nineteenth-century wave riders, if not for the modern
board shorts and bikinis they wear. Sternbach
characterizes wet plate photography as “one part
photography, one part performance art, and one part
three-ring circus,” a worthwhile endeavor because it
produces the unique, haunting images she seeks. “When I
look at a digital print,” she says, “it might be gorgeous
and smooth, but it’s on a piece of paper and it’s one of
many.”

Questions 23-33 are based on the following passage.
Wet Plate Photography: An Old Technique Makes a
New Splash
[1] Upon the arrival of the digital camera,
professional photographers harrumphed that( 23 )they
produced ugly, low-resolution images. [2] Yet eventually
the vast majority of them traded film for megapixels.
[3] The latest digital cameras take pictures so crisp that
the images in them appear to be die-cut. [4] Even today’s
humblest smartphones snap bright, sharp photos. [5] A
few contemporary photographers, however, have
embraced an anachronistic method that was state-ofthe-art technology when it was invented in 1851: wet
plate photography. (24)
Wet plate photographers essentially create their own
film. The process can be dangerous, given that it requires
the use of several volatile chemicals. (25) To take a wet
plate photograph, photographers usually first arrange or
pose (26) it’s subjects before mixing collodion (a viscous,
light-sensitive chemical solution) with bromide, iodide,
or chloride and applying the mixture to a clean, polished
glass plate. Dried collodion is unusable, (27) so once the
photo is snapped with a massive, tripod-mounted
camera, the photographer has (28) nominal minutes to
develop it, using more chemicals. When the image
appears in the negative, water is used to stop the process.
A chemical “fix bath” turns the negative image into a
positive one. The photo is then immersed in water and
warmed. (29) In conclusion, it is coated with lavender
(30 )oil to give it (a protective finish).
Wet plate photos are marvelously fine-grained and
detailed, and they seem to glow with an ethereal silvery
light. One misstep or a speck of dust on the glass plate,
though, and flaws appear. Smudges resembling oyster
shells (31) swirl around the photos’ edges. Sunbursts or
streaks emerge where collodion pools unevenly. Since the
film requires long exposures, moving subjects blur. (32) A
shifting arm or leg might even disappear because of the
lengthy exposure time required. The exposure time
required explains why people in wet plate photographs
often look dour: it’s hard to hold a smile for that long.
Prominent among contemporary wet plate
photographers is Joni Sternbach, whose work centers,
appropriately, on water and people’s relationship to it.
Sternbach’s photo series Ocean Details, Sea/Sky, and
SurfLand depict surging surfs, roiling waves, and the
surfers who ride them. (33 )Her subjects could be
nineteenth-century wave riders, if not for the modern
board shorts and bikinis they wear. Sternbach
characterizes wet plate photography as “one part
photography, one part performance art, and one part
three-ring circus,” a worthwhile endeavor because it
produces the unique, haunting images she seeks. “When I
look at a digital print,” she says, “it might be gorgeous
and smooth, but it’s on a piece of paper and it’s one of
many.”

Questions 23-33 are based on the following passage.
Wet Plate Photography: An Old Technique Makes a
New Splash
[1] Upon the arrival of the digital camera,
professional photographers harrumphed that( 23 )they
produced ugly, low-resolution images. [2] Yet eventually
the vast majority of them traded film for megapixels.
[3] The latest digital cameras take pictures so crisp that
the images in them appear to be die-cut. [4] Even today’s
humblest smartphones snap bright, sharp photos. [5] A
few contemporary photographers, however, have
embraced an anachronistic method that was state-ofthe-art technology when it was invented in 1851: wet
plate photography. (24)
Wet plate photographers essentially create their own
film. The process can be dangerous, given that it requires
the use of several volatile chemicals. (25) To take a wet
plate photograph, photographers usually first arrange or
pose (26) it’s subjects before mixing collodion (a viscous,
light-sensitive chemical solution) with bromide, iodide,
or chloride and applying the mixture to a clean, polished
glass plate. Dried collodion is unusable, (27) so once the
photo is snapped with a massive, tripod-mounted
camera, the photographer has (28) nominal minutes to
develop it, using more chemicals. When the image
appears in the negative, water is used to stop the process.
A chemical “fix bath” turns the negative image into a
positive one. The photo is then immersed in water and
warmed. (29) In conclusion, it is coated with lavender
(30 )oil to give it (a protective finish).
Wet plate photos are marvelously fine-grained and
detailed, and they seem to glow with an ethereal silvery
light. One misstep or a speck of dust on the glass plate,
though, and flaws appear. Smudges resembling oyster
shells (31) swirl around the photos’ edges. Sunbursts or
streaks emerge where collodion pools unevenly. Since the
film requires long exposures, moving subjects blur. (32) A
shifting arm or leg might even disappear because of the
lengthy exposure time required. The exposure time
required explains why people in wet plate photographs
often look dour: it’s hard to hold a smile for that long.
Prominent among contemporary wet plate
photographers is Joni Sternbach, whose work centers,
appropriately, on water and people’s relationship to it.
Sternbach’s photo series Ocean Details, Sea/Sky, and
SurfLand depict surging surfs, roiling waves, and the
surfers who ride them. (33 )Her subjects could be
nineteenth-century wave riders, if not for the modern
board shorts and bikinis they wear. Sternbach
characterizes wet plate photography as “one part
photography, one part performance art, and one part
three-ring circus,” a worthwhile endeavor because it
produces the unique, haunting images she seeks. “When I
look at a digital print,” she says, “it might be gorgeous
and smooth, but it’s on a piece of paper and it’s one of
many.”

Questions 23-33 are based on the following passage.
Wet Plate Photography: An Old Technique Makes a
New Splash
[1] Upon the arrival of the digital camera,
professional photographers harrumphed that( 23 )they
produced ugly, low-resolution images. [2] Yet eventually
the vast majority of them traded film for megapixels.
[3] The latest digital cameras take pictures so crisp that
the images in them appear to be die-cut. [4] Even today’s
humblest smartphones snap bright, sharp photos. [5] A
few contemporary photographers, however, have
embraced an anachronistic method that was state-ofthe-art technology when it was invented in 1851: wet
plate photography. (24)
Wet plate photographers essentially create their own
film. The process can be dangerous, given that it requires
the use of several volatile chemicals. (25) To take a wet
plate photograph, photographers usually first arrange or
pose (26) it’s subjects before mixing collodion (a viscous,
light-sensitive chemical solution) with bromide, iodide,
or chloride and applying the mixture to a clean, polished
glass plate. Dried collodion is unusable, (27) so once the
photo is snapped with a massive, tripod-mounted
camera, the photographer has (28) nominal minutes to
develop it, using more chemicals. When the image
appears in the negative, water is used to stop the process.
A chemical “fix bath” turns the negative image into a
positive one. The photo is then immersed in water and
warmed. (29) In conclusion, it is coated with lavender
(30 )oil to give it (a protective finish).
Wet plate photos are marvelously fine-grained and
detailed, and they seem to glow with an ethereal silvery
light. One misstep or a speck of dust on the glass plate,
though, and flaws appear. Smudges resembling oyster
shells (31) swirl around the photos’ edges. Sunbursts or
streaks emerge where collodion pools unevenly. Since the
film requires long exposures, moving subjects blur. (32) A
shifting arm or leg might even disappear because of the
lengthy exposure time required. The exposure time
required explains why people in wet plate photographs
often look dour: it’s hard to hold a smile for that long.
Prominent among contemporary wet plate
photographers is Joni Sternbach, whose work centers,
appropriately, on water and people’s relationship to it.
Sternbach’s photo series Ocean Details, Sea/Sky, and
SurfLand depict surging surfs, roiling waves, and the
surfers who ride them. (33 )Her subjects could be
nineteenth-century wave riders, if not for the modern
board shorts and bikinis they wear. Sternbach
characterizes wet plate photography as “one part
photography, one part performance art, and one part
three-ring circus,” a worthwhile endeavor because it
produces the unique, haunting images she seeks. “When I
look at a digital print,” she says, “it might be gorgeous
and smooth, but it’s on a piece of paper and it’s one of
many.”

Questions 23-33 are based on the following passage.
Wet Plate Photography: An Old Technique Makes a
New Splash
[1] Upon the arrival of the digital camera,
professional photographers harrumphed that( 23 )they
produced ugly, low-resolution images. [2] Yet eventually
the vast majority of them traded film for megapixels.
[3] The latest digital cameras take pictures so crisp that
the images in them appear to be die-cut. [4] Even today’s
humblest smartphones snap bright, sharp photos. [5] A
few contemporary photographers, however, have
embraced an anachronistic method that was state-ofthe-art technology when it was invented in 1851: wet
plate photography. (24)
Wet plate photographers essentially create their own
film. The process can be dangerous, given that it requires
the use of several volatile chemicals. (25) To take a wet
plate photograph, photographers usually first arrange or
pose (26) it’s subjects before mixing collodion (a viscous,
light-sensitive chemical solution) with bromide, iodide,
or chloride and applying the mixture to a clean, polished
glass plate. Dried collodion is unusable, (27) so once the
photo is snapped with a massive, tripod-mounted
camera, the photographer has (28) nominal minutes to
develop it, using more chemicals. When the image
appears in the negative, water is used to stop the process.
A chemical “fix bath” turns the negative image into a
positive one. The photo is then immersed in water and
warmed. (29) In conclusion, it is coated with lavender
(30 )oil to give it (a protective finish).
Wet plate photos are marvelously fine-grained and
detailed, and they seem to glow with an ethereal silvery
light. One misstep or a speck of dust on the glass plate,
though, and flaws appear. Smudges resembling oyster
shells (31) swirl around the photos’ edges. Sunbursts or
streaks emerge where collodion pools unevenly. Since the
film requires long exposures, moving subjects blur. (32) A
shifting arm or leg might even disappear because of the
lengthy exposure time required. The exposure time
required explains why people in wet plate photographs
often look dour: it’s hard to hold a smile for that long.
Prominent among contemporary wet plate
photographers is Joni Sternbach, whose work centers,
appropriately, on water and people’s relationship to it.
Sternbach’s photo series Ocean Details, Sea/Sky, and
SurfLand depict surging surfs, roiling waves, and the
surfers who ride them. (33 )Her subjects could be
nineteenth-century wave riders, if not for the modern
board shorts and bikinis they wear. Sternbach
characterizes wet plate photography as “one part
photography, one part performance art, and one part
three-ring circus,” a worthwhile endeavor because it
produces the unique, haunting images she seeks. “When I
look at a digital print,” she says, “it might be gorgeous
and smooth, but it’s on a piece of paper and it’s one of
many.”

Questions 23-33 are based on the following passage.
Wet Plate Photography: An Old Technique Makes a
New Splash
[1] Upon the arrival of the digital camera,
professional photographers harrumphed that( 23 )they
produced ugly, low-resolution images. [2] Yet eventually
the vast majority of them traded film for megapixels.
[3] The latest digital cameras take pictures so crisp that
the images in them appear to be die-cut. [4] Even today’s
humblest smartphones snap bright, sharp photos. [5] A
few contemporary photographers, however, have
embraced an anachronistic method that was state-ofthe-art technology when it was invented in 1851: wet
plate photography. (24)
Wet plate photographers essentially create their own
film. The process can be dangerous, given that it requires
the use of several volatile chemicals. (25) To take a wet
plate photograph, photographers usually first arrange or
pose (26) it’s subjects before mixing collodion (a viscous,
light-sensitive chemical solution) with bromide, iodide,
or chloride and applying the mixture to a clean, polished
glass plate. Dried collodion is unusable, (27) so once the
photo is snapped with a massive, tripod-mounted
camera, the photographer has (28) nominal minutes to
develop it, using more chemicals. When the image
appears in the negative, water is used to stop the process.
A chemical “fix bath” turns the negative image into a
positive one. The photo is then immersed in water and
warmed. (29) In conclusion, it is coated with lavender
(30 )oil to give it (a protective finish).
Wet plate photos are marvelously fine-grained and
detailed, and they seem to glow with an ethereal silvery
light. One misstep or a speck of dust on the glass plate,
though, and flaws appear. Smudges resembling oyster
shells (31) swirl around the photos’ edges. Sunbursts or
streaks emerge where collodion pools unevenly. Since the
film requires long exposures, moving subjects blur. (32) A
shifting arm or leg might even disappear because of the
lengthy exposure time required. The exposure time
required explains why people in wet plate photographs
often look dour: it’s hard to hold a smile for that long.
Prominent among contemporary wet plate
photographers is Joni Sternbach, whose work centers,
appropriately, on water and people’s relationship to it.
Sternbach’s photo series Ocean Details, Sea/Sky, and
SurfLand depict surging surfs, roiling waves, and the
surfers who ride them. (33 )Her subjects could be
nineteenth-century wave riders, if not for the modern
board shorts and bikinis they wear. Sternbach
characterizes wet plate photography as “one part
photography, one part performance art, and one part
three-ring circus,” a worthwhile endeavor because it
produces the unique, haunting images she seeks. “When I
look at a digital print,” she says, “it might be gorgeous
and smooth, but it’s on a piece of paper and it’s one of
many.”

Questions 23-33 are based on the following passage.
Wet Plate Photography: An Old Technique Makes a
New Splash
[1] Upon the arrival of the digital camera,
professional photographers harrumphed that( 23 )they
produced ugly, low-resolution images. [2] Yet eventually
the vast majority of them traded film for megapixels.
[3] The latest digital cameras take pictures so crisp that
the images in them appear to be die-cut. [4] Even today’s
humblest smartphones snap bright, sharp photos. [5] A
few contemporary photographers, however, have
embraced an anachronistic method that was state-ofthe-art technology when it was invented in 1851: wet
plate photography. (24)
Wet plate photographers essentially create their own
film. The process can be dangerous, given that it requires
the use of several volatile chemicals. (25) To take a wet
plate photograph, photographers usually first arrange or
pose (26) it’s subjects before mixing collodion (a viscous,
light-sensitive chemical solution) with bromide, iodide,
or chloride and applying the mixture to a clean, polished
glass plate. Dried collodion is unusable, (27) so once the
photo is snapped with a massive, tripod-mounted
camera, the photographer has (28) nominal minutes to
develop it, using more chemicals. When the image
appears in the negative, water is used to stop the process.
A chemical “fix bath” turns the negative image into a
positive one. The photo is then immersed in water and
warmed. (29) In conclusion, it is coated with lavender
(30 )oil to give it (a protective finish).
Wet plate photos are marvelously fine-grained and
detailed, and they seem to glow with an ethereal silvery
light. One misstep or a speck of dust on the glass plate,
though, and flaws appear. Smudges resembling oyster
shells (31) swirl around the photos’ edges. Sunbursts or
streaks emerge where collodion pools unevenly. Since the
film requires long exposures, moving subjects blur. (32) A
shifting arm or leg might even disappear because of the
lengthy exposure time required. The exposure time
required explains why people in wet plate photographs
often look dour: it’s hard to hold a smile for that long.
Prominent among contemporary wet plate
photographers is Joni Sternbach, whose work centers,
appropriately, on water and people’s relationship to it.
Sternbach’s photo series Ocean Details, Sea/Sky, and
SurfLand depict surging surfs, roiling waves, and the
surfers who ride them. (33 )Her subjects could be
nineteenth-century wave riders, if not for the modern
board shorts and bikinis they wear. Sternbach
characterizes wet plate photography as “one part
photography, one part performance art, and one part
three-ring circus,” a worthwhile endeavor because it
produces the unique, haunting images she seeks. “When I
look at a digital print,” she says, “it might be gorgeous
and smooth, but it’s on a piece of paper and it’s one of
many.”

Questions 23-33 are based on the following passage.
Wet Plate Photography: An Old Technique Makes a
New Splash
[1] Upon the arrival of the digital camera,
professional photographers harrumphed that( 23 )they
produced ugly, low-resolution images. [2] Yet eventually
the vast majority of them traded film for megapixels.
[3] The latest digital cameras take pictures so crisp that
the images in them appear to be die-cut. [4] Even today’s
humblest smartphones snap bright, sharp photos. [5] A
few contemporary photographers, however, have
embraced an anachronistic method that was state-ofthe-art technology when it was invented in 1851: wet
plate photography. (24)
Wet plate photographers essentially create their own
film. The process can be dangerous, given that it requires
the use of several volatile chemicals. (25) To take a wet
plate photograph, photographers usually first arrange or
pose (26) it’s subjects before mixing collodion (a viscous,
light-sensitive chemical solution) with bromide, iodide,
or chloride and applying the mixture to a clean, polished
glass plate. Dried collodion is unusable, (27) so once the
photo is snapped with a massive, tripod-mounted
camera, the photographer has (28) nominal minutes to
develop it, using more chemicals. When the image
appears in the negative, water is used to stop the process.
A chemical “fix bath” turns the negative image into a
positive one. The photo is then immersed in water and
warmed. (29) In conclusion, it is coated with lavender
(30 )oil to give it (a protective finish).
Wet plate photos are marvelously fine-grained and
detailed, and they seem to glow with an ethereal silvery
light. One misstep or a speck of dust on the glass plate,
though, and flaws appear. Smudges resembling oyster
shells (31) swirl around the photos’ edges. Sunbursts or
streaks emerge where collodion pools unevenly. Since the
film requires long exposures, moving subjects blur. (32) A
shifting arm or leg might even disappear because of the
lengthy exposure time required. The exposure time
required explains why people in wet plate photographs
often look dour: it’s hard to hold a smile for that long.
Prominent among contemporary wet plate
photographers is Joni Sternbach, whose work centers,
appropriately, on water and people’s relationship to it.
Sternbach’s photo series Ocean Details, Sea/Sky, and
SurfLand depict surging surfs, roiling waves, and the
surfers who ride them. (33 )Her subjects could be
nineteenth-century wave riders, if not for the modern
board shorts and bikinis they wear. Sternbach
characterizes wet plate photography as “one part
photography, one part performance art, and one part
three-ring circus,” a worthwhile endeavor because it
produces the unique, haunting images she seeks. “When I
look at a digital print,” she says, “it might be gorgeous
and smooth, but it’s on a piece of paper and it’s one of
many.”

Questions 23-33 are based on the following passage.
Wet Plate Photography: An Old Technique Makes a
New Splash
[1] Upon the arrival of the digital camera,
professional photographers harrumphed that( 23 )they
produced ugly, low-resolution images. [2] Yet eventually
the vast majority of them traded film for megapixels.
[3] The latest digital cameras take pictures so crisp that
the images in them appear to be die-cut. [4] Even today’s
humblest smartphones snap bright, sharp photos. [5] A
few contemporary photographers, however, have
embraced an anachronistic method that was state-ofthe-art technology when it was invented in 1851: wet
plate photography. (24)
Wet plate photographers essentially create their own
film. The process can be dangerous, given that it requires
the use of several volatile chemicals. (25) To take a wet
plate photograph, photographers usually first arrange or
pose (26) it’s subjects before mixing collodion (a viscous,
light-sensitive chemical solution) with bromide, iodide,
or chloride and applying the mixture to a clean, polished
glass plate. Dried collodion is unusable, (27) so once the
photo is snapped with a massive, tripod-mounted
camera, the photographer has (28) nominal minutes to
develop it, using more chemicals. When the image
appears in the negative, water is used to stop the process.
A chemical “fix bath” turns the negative image into a
positive one. The photo is then immersed in water and
warmed. (29) In conclusion, it is coated with lavender
(30 )oil to give it (a protective finish).
Wet plate photos are marvelously fine-grained and
detailed, and they seem to glow with an ethereal silvery
light. One misstep or a speck of dust on the glass plate,
though, and flaws appear. Smudges resembling oyster
shells (31) swirl around the photos’ edges. Sunbursts or
streaks emerge where collodion pools unevenly. Since the
film requires long exposures, moving subjects blur. (32) A
shifting arm or leg might even disappear because of the
lengthy exposure time required. The exposure time
required explains why people in wet plate photographs
often look dour: it’s hard to hold a smile for that long.
Prominent among contemporary wet plate
photographers is Joni Sternbach, whose work centers,
appropriately, on water and people’s relationship to it.
Sternbach’s photo series Ocean Details, Sea/Sky, and
SurfLand depict surging surfs, roiling waves, and the
surfers who ride them. (33 )Her subjects could be
nineteenth-century wave riders, if not for the modern
board shorts and bikinis they wear. Sternbach
characterizes wet plate photography as “one part
photography, one part performance art, and one part
three-ring circus,” a worthwhile endeavor because it
produces the unique, haunting images she seeks. “When I
look at a digital print,” she says, “it might be gorgeous
and smooth, but it’s on a piece of paper and it’s one of
many.”

Questions 23-33 are based on the following passage.
Wet Plate Photography: An Old Technique Makes a
New Splash
[1] Upon the arrival of the digital camera,
professional photographers harrumphed that( 23 )they
produced ugly, low-resolution images. [2] Yet eventually
the vast majority of them traded film for megapixels.
[3] The latest digital cameras take pictures so crisp that
the images in them appear to be die-cut. [4] Even today’s
humblest smartphones snap bright, sharp photos. [5] A
few contemporary photographers, however, have
embraced an anachronistic method that was state-ofthe-art technology when it was invented in 1851: wet
plate photography. (24)
Wet plate photographers essentially create their own
film. The process can be dangerous, given that it requires
the use of several volatile chemicals. (25) To take a wet
plate photograph, photographers usually first arrange or
pose (26) it’s subjects before mixing collodion (a viscous,
light-sensitive chemical solution) with bromide, iodide,
or chloride and applying the mixture to a clean, polished
glass plate. Dried collodion is unusable, (27) so once the
photo is snapped with a massive, tripod-mounted
camera, the photographer has (28) nominal minutes to
develop it, using more chemicals. When the image
appears in the negative, water is used to stop the process.
A chemical “fix bath” turns the negative image into a
positive one. The photo is then immersed in water and
warmed. (29) In conclusion, it is coated with lavender
(30 )oil to give it (a protective finish).
Wet plate photos are marvelously fine-grained and
detailed, and they seem to glow with an ethereal silvery
light. One misstep or a speck of dust on the glass plate,
though, and flaws appear. Smudges resembling oyster
shells (31) swirl around the photos’ edges. Sunbursts or
streaks emerge where collodion pools unevenly. Since the
film requires long exposures, moving subjects blur. (32) A
shifting arm or leg might even disappear because of the
lengthy exposure time required. The exposure time
required explains why people in wet plate photographs
often look dour: it’s hard to hold a smile for that long.
Prominent among contemporary wet plate
photographers is Joni Sternbach, whose work centers,
appropriately, on water and people’s relationship to it.
Sternbach’s photo series Ocean Details, Sea/Sky, and
SurfLand depict surging surfs, roiling waves, and the
surfers who ride them. (33 )Her subjects could be
nineteenth-century wave riders, if not for the modern
board shorts and bikinis they wear. Sternbach
characterizes wet plate photography as “one part
photography, one part performance art, and one part
three-ring circus,” a worthwhile endeavor because it
produces the unique, haunting images she seeks. “When I
look at a digital print,” she says, “it might be gorgeous
and smooth, but it’s on a piece of paper and it’s one of
many.”

Questions 23-33 are based on the following passage.
Wet Plate Photography: An Old Technique Makes a
New Splash
[1] Upon the arrival of the digital camera,
professional photographers harrumphed that( 23 )they
produced ugly, low-resolution images. [2] Yet eventually
the vast majority of them traded film for megapixels.
[3] The latest digital cameras take pictures so crisp that
the images in them appear to be die-cut. [4] Even today’s
humblest smartphones snap bright, sharp photos. [5] A
few contemporary photographers, however, have
embraced an anachronistic method that was state-ofthe-art technology when it was invented in 1851: wet
plate photography. (24)
Wet plate photographers essentially create their own
film. The process can be dangerous, given that it requires
the use of several volatile chemicals. (25) To take a wet
plate photograph, photographers usually first arrange or
pose (26) it’s subjects before mixing collodion (a viscous,
light-sensitive chemical solution) with bromide, iodide,
or chloride and applying the mixture to a clean, polished
glass plate. Dried collodion is unusable, (27) so once the
photo is snapped with a massive, tripod-mounted
camera, the photographer has (28) nominal minutes to
develop it, using more chemicals. When the image
appears in the negative, water is used to stop the process.
A chemical “fix bath” turns the negative image into a
positive one. The photo is then immersed in water and
warmed. (29) In conclusion, it is coated with lavender
(30 )oil to give it (a protective finish).
Wet plate photos are marvelously fine-grained and
detailed, and they seem to glow with an ethereal silvery
light. One misstep or a speck of dust on the glass plate,
though, and flaws appear. Smudges resembling oyster
shells (31) swirl around the photos’ edges. Sunbursts or
streaks emerge where collodion pools unevenly. Since the
film requires long exposures, moving subjects blur. (32) A
shifting arm or leg might even disappear because of the
lengthy exposure time required. The exposure time
required explains why people in wet plate photographs
often look dour: it’s hard to hold a smile for that long.
Prominent among contemporary wet plate
photographers is Joni Sternbach, whose work centers,
appropriately, on water and people’s relationship to it.
Sternbach’s photo series Ocean Details, Sea/Sky, and
SurfLand depict surging surfs, roiling waves, and the
surfers who ride them. (33 )Her subjects could be
nineteenth-century wave riders, if not for the modern
board shorts and bikinis they wear. Sternbach
characterizes wet plate photography as “one part
photography, one part performance art, and one part
three-ring circus,” a worthwhile endeavor because it
produces the unique, haunting images she seeks. “When I
look at a digital print,” she says, “it might be gorgeous
and smooth, but it’s on a piece of paper and it’s one of
many.”

Questions 34-44 are based on the following passage.
Digging Up Cities
In 2010, as a construction crew began to tear up
sidewalks in New York City’s South Street Seaport to
replace a water pipe, Alyssa Loorya and her team watched
eagerly, picks and brushes in hand. Loorya, an urban
archaeologist, studies the history of (34 )cities. Any New
York City construction project using municipal funds
(35) are required to consider whether historical artifacts
will be affected during construction, and if that
possibility (36) exists or is possible, an urban
archaeologist must be consulted. Since the South Street
Seaport area was a bustling commercial center for early
colonists, Loorya anticipated that a rich history lay
beneath the pavement. “It’s our job to document and
recover that history before it’s lost,” she said.
As the work continued, (37) therefore, the team
faced obstacles. Fieldwork in a city has to be done
intermittently: the construction crew had to proceed one
block at a time to avoid interrupting traffic, and the
archaeology team’s work was periodically (38) halted—by
stormy weather and the discovery of toxic materials
underground. Moreover, as archaeologists underground
attempted to relay information to those at the surface,
they had to contend with the noise of construction
vehicles, car horns, and (39) pedestrians’ noise on the
busy New York City streets.
Despite these setbacks, Loorya and her team
eventually began to uncover some interesting artifacts. In
2012, the team discovered a foundation wall, a network of
wooden pipes, and several well bases dating to the
eighteenth century. In August 2013, the archaeologists
discovered thousands of objects in a single fifteen-foot
stretch that was likely a garbage disposal (40) site.
Including buttons from Revolutionary War uniforms,
clay pipes, and an imported mineral water bottle from
Germany.
As they cleaned and catalogued the artifacts, the
archaeologists took stock of their findings. The team’s
discoveries provided a snapshot of (41) the various kinds
of construction materials that were used in the eighteenth
century. Colonial-era New Yorkers went to great lengths
to secure fresh drinking water, Loorya noted, given the
(42 )effort involved in laying wooden pipes to bring in
fresh water from surrounding areas, digging very deep
wells, brewing alcohol to mask the water’s salty taste, and
even importing bottled water
Through such discoveries, (43) they tell the story of a
city’s history in a new way. (44) “One of my favorite
things is putting together someone’s life,” Loorya said.

Questions 34-44 are based on the following passage.
Digging Up Cities
In 2010, as a construction crew began to tear up
sidewalks in New York City’s South Street Seaport to
replace a water pipe, Alyssa Loorya and her team watched
eagerly, picks and brushes in hand. Loorya, an urban
archaeologist, studies the history of (34 )cities. Any New
York City construction project using municipal funds
(35) are required to consider whether historical artifacts
will be affected during construction, and if that
possibility (36) exists or is possible, an urban
archaeologist must be consulted. Since the South Street
Seaport area was a bustling commercial center for early
colonists, Loorya anticipated that a rich history lay
beneath the pavement. “It’s our job to document and
recover that history before it’s lost,” she said.
As the work continued, (37) therefore, the team
faced obstacles. Fieldwork in a city has to be done
intermittently: the construction crew had to proceed one
block at a time to avoid interrupting traffic, and the
archaeology team’s work was periodically (38) halted—by
stormy weather and the discovery of toxic materials
underground. Moreover, as archaeologists underground
attempted to relay information to those at the surface,
they had to contend with the noise of construction
vehicles, car horns, and (39) pedestrians’ noise on the
busy New York City streets.
Despite these setbacks, Loorya and her team
eventually began to uncover some interesting artifacts. In
2012, the team discovered a foundation wall, a network of
wooden pipes, and several well bases dating to the
eighteenth century. In August 2013, the archaeologists
discovered thousands of objects in a single fifteen-foot
stretch that was likely a garbage disposal (40) site.
Including buttons from Revolutionary War uniforms,
clay pipes, and an imported mineral water bottle from
Germany.
As they cleaned and catalogued the artifacts, the
archaeologists took stock of their findings. The team’s
discoveries provided a snapshot of (41) the various kinds
of construction materials that were used in the eighteenth
century. Colonial-era New Yorkers went to great lengths
to secure fresh drinking water, Loorya noted, given the
(42 )effort involved in laying wooden pipes to bring in
fresh water from surrounding areas, digging very deep
wells, brewing alcohol to mask the water’s salty taste, and
even importing bottled water
Through such discoveries, (43) they tell the story of a
city’s history in a new way. (44) “One of my favorite
things is putting together someone’s life,” Loorya said.

Questions 34-44 are based on the following passage.
Digging Up Cities
In 2010, as a construction crew began to tear up
sidewalks in New York City’s South Street Seaport to
replace a water pipe, Alyssa Loorya and her team watched
eagerly, picks and brushes in hand. Loorya, an urban
archaeologist, studies the history of (34 )cities. Any New
York City construction project using municipal funds
(35) are required to consider whether historical artifacts
will be affected during construction, and if that
possibility (36) exists or is possible, an urban
archaeologist must be consulted. Since the South Street
Seaport area was a bustling commercial center for early
colonists, Loorya anticipated that a rich history lay
beneath the pavement. “It’s our job to document and
recover that history before it’s lost,” she said.
As the work continued, (37) therefore, the team
faced obstacles. Fieldwork in a city has to be done
intermittently: the construction crew had to proceed one
block at a time to avoid interrupting traffic, and the
archaeology team’s work was periodically (38) halted—by
stormy weather and the discovery of toxic materials
underground. Moreover, as archaeologists underground
attempted to relay information to those at the surface,
they had to contend with the noise of construction
vehicles, car horns, and (39) pedestrians’ noise on the
busy New York City streets.
Despite these setbacks, Loorya and her team
eventually began to uncover some interesting artifacts. In
2012, the team discovered a foundation wall, a network of
wooden pipes, and several well bases dating to the
eighteenth century. In August 2013, the archaeologists
discovered thousands of objects in a single fifteen-foot
stretch that was likely a garbage disposal (40) site.
Including buttons from Revolutionary War uniforms,
clay pipes, and an imported mineral water bottle from
Germany.
As they cleaned and catalogued the artifacts, the
archaeologists took stock of their findings. The team’s
discoveries provided a snapshot of (41) the various kinds
of construction materials that were used in the eighteenth
century. Colonial-era New Yorkers went to great lengths
to secure fresh drinking water, Loorya noted, given the
(42 )effort involved in laying wooden pipes to bring in
fresh water from surrounding areas, digging very deep
wells, brewing alcohol to mask the water’s salty taste, and
even importing bottled water
Through such discoveries, (43) they tell the story of a
city’s history in a new way. (44) “One of my favorite
things is putting together someone’s life,” Loorya said.

Questions 34-44 are based on the following passage.
Digging Up Cities
In 2010, as a construction crew began to tear up
sidewalks in New York City’s South Street Seaport to
replace a water pipe, Alyssa Loorya and her team watched
eagerly, picks and brushes in hand. Loorya, an urban
archaeologist, studies the history of (34 )cities. Any New
York City construction project using municipal funds
(35) are required to consider whether historical artifacts
will be affected during construction, and if that
possibility (36) exists or is possible, an urban
archaeologist must be consulted. Since the South Street
Seaport area was a bustling commercial center for early
colonists, Loorya anticipated that a rich history lay
beneath the pavement. “It’s our job to document and
recover that history before it’s lost,” she said.
As the work continued, (37) therefore, the team
faced obstacles. Fieldwork in a city has to be done
intermittently: the construction crew had to proceed one
block at a time to avoid interrupting traffic, and the
archaeology team’s work was periodically (38) halted—by
stormy weather and the discovery of toxic materials
underground. Moreover, as archaeologists underground
attempted to relay information to those at the surface,
they had to contend with the noise of construction
vehicles, car horns, and (39) pedestrians’ noise on the
busy New York City streets.
Despite these setbacks, Loorya and her team
eventually began to uncover some interesting artifacts. In
2012, the team discovered a foundation wall, a network of
wooden pipes, and several well bases dating to the
eighteenth century. In August 2013, the archaeologists
discovered thousands of objects in a single fifteen-foot
stretch that was likely a garbage disposal (40) site.
Including buttons from Revolutionary War uniforms,
clay pipes, and an imported mineral water bottle from
Germany.
As they cleaned and catalogued the artifacts, the
archaeologists took stock of their findings. The team’s
discoveries provided a snapshot of (41) the various kinds
of construction materials that were used in the eighteenth
century. Colonial-era New Yorkers went to great lengths
to secure fresh drinking water, Loorya noted, given the
(42 )effort involved in laying wooden pipes to bring in
fresh water from surrounding areas, digging very deep
wells, brewing alcohol to mask the water’s salty taste, and
even importing bottled water
Through such discoveries, (43) they tell the story of a
city’s history in a new way. (44) “One of my favorite
things is putting together someone’s life,” Loorya said.

Questions 34-44 are based on the following passage.
Digging Up Cities
In 2010, as a construction crew began to tear up
sidewalks in New York City’s South Street Seaport to
replace a water pipe, Alyssa Loorya and her team watched
eagerly, picks and brushes in hand. Loorya, an urban
archaeologist, studies the history of (34 )cities. Any New
York City construction project using municipal funds
(35) are required to consider whether historical artifacts
will be affected during construction, and if that
possibility (36) exists or is possible, an urban
archaeologist must be consulted. Since the South Street
Seaport area was a bustling commercial center for early
colonists, Loorya anticipated that a rich history lay
beneath the pavement. “It’s our job to document and
recover that history before it’s lost,” she said.
As the work continued, (37) therefore, the team
faced obstacles. Fieldwork in a city has to be done
intermittently: the construction crew had to proceed one
block at a time to avoid interrupting traffic, and the
archaeology team’s work was periodically (38) halted—by
stormy weather and the discovery of toxic materials
underground. Moreover, as archaeologists underground
attempted to relay information to those at the surface,
they had to contend with the noise of construction
vehicles, car horns, and (39) pedestrians’ noise on the
busy New York City streets.
Despite these setbacks, Loorya and her team
eventually began to uncover some interesting artifacts. In
2012, the team discovered a foundation wall, a network of
wooden pipes, and several well bases dating to the
eighteenth century. In August 2013, the archaeologists
discovered thousands of objects in a single fifteen-foot
stretch that was likely a garbage disposal (40) site.
Including buttons from Revolutionary War uniforms,
clay pipes, and an imported mineral water bottle from
Germany.
As they cleaned and catalogued the artifacts, the
archaeologists took stock of their findings. The team’s
discoveries provided a snapshot of (41) the various kinds
of construction materials that were used in the eighteenth
century. Colonial-era New Yorkers went to great lengths
to secure fresh drinking water, Loorya noted, given the
(42 )effort involved in laying wooden pipes to bring in
fresh water from surrounding areas, digging very deep
wells, brewing alcohol to mask the water’s salty taste, and
even importing bottled water
Through such discoveries, (43) they tell the story of a
city’s history in a new way. (44) “One of my favorite
things is putting together someone’s life,” Loorya said.

Questions 34-44 are based on the following passage.
Digging Up Cities
In 2010, as a construction crew began to tear up
sidewalks in New York City’s South Street Seaport to
replace a water pipe, Alyssa Loorya and her team watched
eagerly, picks and brushes in hand. Loorya, an urban
archaeologist, studies the history of (34 )cities. Any New
York City construction project using municipal funds
(35) are required to consider whether historical artifacts
will be affected during construction, and if that
possibility (36) exists or is possible, an urban
archaeologist must be consulted. Since the South Street
Seaport area was a bustling commercial center for early
colonists, Loorya anticipated that a rich history lay
beneath the pavement. “It’s our job to document and
recover that history before it’s lost,” she said.
As the work continued, (37) therefore, the team
faced obstacles. Fieldwork in a city has to be done
intermittently: the construction crew had to proceed one
block at a time to avoid interrupting traffic, and the
archaeology team’s work was periodically (38) halted—by
stormy weather and the discovery of toxic materials
underground. Moreover, as archaeologists underground
attempted to relay information to those at the surface,
they had to contend with the noise of construction
vehicles, car horns, and (39) pedestrians’ noise on the
busy New York City streets.
Despite these setbacks, Loorya and her team
eventually began to uncover some interesting artifacts. In
2012, the team discovered a foundation wall, a network of
wooden pipes, and several well bases dating to the
eighteenth century. In August 2013, the archaeologists
discovered thousands of objects in a single fifteen-foot
stretch that was likely a garbage disposal (40) site.
Including buttons from Revolutionary War uniforms,
clay pipes, and an imported mineral water bottle from
Germany.
As they cleaned and catalogued the artifacts, the
archaeologists took stock of their findings. The team’s
discoveries provided a snapshot of (41) the various kinds
of construction materials that were used in the eighteenth
century. Colonial-era New Yorkers went to great lengths
to secure fresh drinking water, Loorya noted, given the
(42 )effort involved in laying wooden pipes to bring in
fresh water from surrounding areas, digging very deep
wells, brewing alcohol to mask the water’s salty taste, and
even importing bottled water
Through such discoveries, (43) they tell the story of a
city’s history in a new way. (44) “One of my favorite
things is putting together someone’s life,” Loorya said.

Questions 34-44 are based on the following passage.
Digging Up Cities
In 2010, as a construction crew began to tear up
sidewalks in New York City’s South Street Seaport to
replace a water pipe, Alyssa Loorya and her team watched
eagerly, picks and brushes in hand. Loorya, an urban
archaeologist, studies the history of (34 )cities. Any New
York City construction project using municipal funds
(35) are required to consider whether historical artifacts
will be affected during construction, and if that
possibility (36) exists or is possible, an urban
archaeologist must be consulted. Since the South Street
Seaport area was a bustling commercial center for early
colonists, Loorya anticipated that a rich history lay
beneath the pavement. “It’s our job to document and
recover that history before it’s lost,” she said.
As the work continued, (37) therefore, the team
faced obstacles. Fieldwork in a city has to be done
intermittently: the construction crew had to proceed one
block at a time to avoid interrupting traffic, and the
archaeology team’s work was periodically (38) halted—by
stormy weather and the discovery of toxic materials
underground. Moreover, as archaeologists underground
attempted to relay information to those at the surface,
they had to contend with the noise of construction
vehicles, car horns, and (39) pedestrians’ noise on the
busy New York City streets.
Despite these setbacks, Loorya and her team
eventually began to uncover some interesting artifacts. In
2012, the team discovered a foundation wall, a network of
wooden pipes, and several well bases dating to the
eighteenth century. In August 2013, the archaeologists
discovered thousands of objects in a single fifteen-foot
stretch that was likely a garbage disposal (40) site.
Including buttons from Revolutionary War uniforms,
clay pipes, and an imported mineral water bottle from
Germany.
As they cleaned and catalogued the artifacts, the
archaeologists took stock of their findings. The team’s
discoveries provided a snapshot of (41) the various kinds
of construction materials that were used in the eighteenth
century. Colonial-era New Yorkers went to great lengths
to secure fresh drinking water, Loorya noted, given the
(42 )effort involved in laying wooden pipes to bring in
fresh water from surrounding areas, digging very deep
wells, brewing alcohol to mask the water’s salty taste, and
even importing bottled water
Through such discoveries, (43) they tell the story of a
city’s history in a new way. (44) “One of my favorite
things is putting together someone’s life,” Loorya said.

Questions 34-44 are based on the following passage.
Digging Up Cities
In 2010, as a construction crew began to tear up
sidewalks in New York City’s South Street Seaport to
replace a water pipe, Alyssa Loorya and her team watched
eagerly, picks and brushes in hand. Loorya, an urban
archaeologist, studies the history of (34 )cities. Any New
York City construction project using municipal funds
(35) are required to consider whether historical artifacts
will be affected during construction, and if that
possibility (36) exists or is possible, an urban
archaeologist must be consulted. Since the South Street
Seaport area was a bustling commercial center for early
colonists, Loorya anticipated that a rich history lay
beneath the pavement. “It’s our job to document and
recover that history before it’s lost,” she said.
As the work continued, (37) therefore, the team
faced obstacles. Fieldwork in a city has to be done
intermittently: the construction crew had to proceed one
block at a time to avoid interrupting traffic, and the
archaeology team’s work was periodically (38) halted—by
stormy weather and the discovery of toxic materials
underground. Moreover, as archaeologists underground
attempted to relay information to those at the surface,
they had to contend with the noise of construction
vehicles, car horns, and (39) pedestrians’ noise on the
busy New York City streets.
Despite these setbacks, Loorya and her team
eventually began to uncover some interesting artifacts. In
2012, the team discovered a foundation wall, a network of
wooden pipes, and several well bases dating to the
eighteenth century. In August 2013, the archaeologists
discovered thousands of objects in a single fifteen-foot
stretch that was likely a garbage disposal (40) site.
Including buttons from Revolutionary War uniforms,
clay pipes, and an imported mineral water bottle from
Germany.
As they cleaned and catalogued the artifacts, the
archaeologists took stock of their findings. The team’s
discoveries provided a snapshot of (41) the various kinds
of construction materials that were used in the eighteenth
century. Colonial-era New Yorkers went to great lengths
to secure fresh drinking water, Loorya noted, given the
(42 )effort involved in laying wooden pipes to bring in
fresh water from surrounding areas, digging very deep
wells, brewing alcohol to mask the water’s salty taste, and
even importing bottled water
Through such discoveries, (43) they tell the story of a
city’s history in a new way. (44) “One of my favorite
things is putting together someone’s life,” Loorya said.

Questions 34-44 are based on the following passage.
Digging Up Cities
In 2010, as a construction crew began to tear up
sidewalks in New York City’s South Street Seaport to
replace a water pipe, Alyssa Loorya and her team watched
eagerly, picks and brushes in hand. Loorya, an urban
archaeologist, studies the history of (34 )cities. Any New
York City construction project using municipal funds
(35) are required to consider whether historical artifacts
will be affected during construction, and if that
possibility (36) exists or is possible, an urban
archaeologist must be consulted. Since the South Street
Seaport area was a bustling commercial center for early
colonists, Loorya anticipated that a rich history lay
beneath the pavement. “It’s our job to document and
recover that history before it’s lost,” she said.
As the work continued, (37) therefore, the team
faced obstacles. Fieldwork in a city has to be done
intermittently: the construction crew had to proceed one
block at a time to avoid interrupting traffic, and the
archaeology team’s work was periodically (38) halted—by
stormy weather and the discovery of toxic materials
underground. Moreover, as archaeologists underground
attempted to relay information to those at the surface,
they had to contend with the noise of construction
vehicles, car horns, and (39) pedestrians’ noise on the
busy New York City streets.
Despite these setbacks, Loorya and her team
eventually began to uncover some interesting artifacts. In
2012, the team discovered a foundation wall, a network of
wooden pipes, and several well bases dating to the
eighteenth century. In August 2013, the archaeologists
discovered thousands of objects in a single fifteen-foot
stretch that was likely a garbage disposal (40) site.
Including buttons from Revolutionary War uniforms,
clay pipes, and an imported mineral water bottle from
Germany.
As they cleaned and catalogued the artifacts, the
archaeologists took stock of their findings. The team’s
discoveries provided a snapshot of (41) the various kinds
of construction materials that were used in the eighteenth
century. Colonial-era New Yorkers went to great lengths
to secure fresh drinking water, Loorya noted, given the
(42 )effort involved in laying wooden pipes to bring in
fresh water from surrounding areas, digging very deep
wells, brewing alcohol to mask the water’s salty taste, and
even importing bottled water
Through such discoveries, (43) they tell the story of a
city’s history in a new way. (44) “One of my favorite
things is putting together someone’s life,” Loorya said.

Questions 34-44 are based on the following passage.
Digging Up Cities
In 2010, as a construction crew began to tear up
sidewalks in New York City’s South Street Seaport to
replace a water pipe, Alyssa Loorya and her team watched
eagerly, picks and brushes in hand. Loorya, an urban
archaeologist, studies the history of (34 )cities. Any New
York City construction project using municipal funds
(35) are required to consider whether historical artifacts
will be affected during construction, and if that
possibility (36) exists or is possible, an urban
archaeologist must be consulted. Since the South Street
Seaport area was a bustling commercial center for early
colonists, Loorya anticipated that a rich history lay
beneath the pavement. “It’s our job to document and
recover that history before it’s lost,” she said.
As the work continued, (37) therefore, the team
faced obstacles. Fieldwork in a city has to be done
intermittently: the construction crew had to proceed one
block at a time to avoid interrupting traffic, and the
archaeology team’s work was periodically (38) halted—by
stormy weather and the discovery of toxic materials
underground. Moreover, as archaeologists underground
attempted to relay information to those at the surface,
they had to contend with the noise of construction
vehicles, car horns, and (39) pedestrians’ noise on the
busy New York City streets.
Despite these setbacks, Loorya and her team
eventually began to uncover some interesting artifacts. In
2012, the team discovered a foundation wall, a network of
wooden pipes, and several well bases dating to the
eighteenth century. In August 2013, the archaeologists
discovered thousands of objects in a single fifteen-foot
stretch that was likely a garbage disposal (40) site.
Including buttons from Revolutionary War uniforms,
clay pipes, and an imported mineral water bottle from
Germany.
As they cleaned and catalogued the artifacts, the
archaeologists took stock of their findings. The team’s
discoveries provided a snapshot of (41) the various kinds
of construction materials that were used in the eighteenth
century. Colonial-era New Yorkers went to great lengths
to secure fresh drinking water, Loorya noted, given the
(42 )effort involved in laying wooden pipes to bring in
fresh water from surrounding areas, digging very deep
wells, brewing alcohol to mask the water’s salty taste, and
even importing bottled water
Through such discoveries, (43) they tell the story of a
city’s history in a new way. (44) “One of my favorite
things is putting together someone’s life,” Loorya said.

Questions 34-44 are based on the following passage.
Digging Up Cities
In 2010, as a construction crew began to tear up
sidewalks in New York City’s South Street Seaport to
replace a water pipe, Alyssa Loorya and her team watched
eagerly, picks and brushes in hand. Loorya, an urban
archaeologist, studies the history of (34 )cities. Any New
York City construction project using municipal funds
(35) are required to consider whether historical artifacts
will be affected during construction, and if that
possibility (36) exists or is possible, an urban
archaeologist must be consulted. Since the South Street
Seaport area was a bustling commercial center for early
colonists, Loorya anticipated that a rich history lay
beneath the pavement. “It’s our job to document and
recover that history before it’s lost,” she said.
As the work continued, (37) therefore, the team
faced obstacles. Fieldwork in a city has to be done
intermittently: the construction crew had to proceed one
block at a time to avoid interrupting traffic, and the
archaeology team’s work was periodically (38) halted—by
stormy weather and the discovery of toxic materials
underground. Moreover, as archaeologists underground
attempted to relay information to those at the surface,
they had to contend with the noise of construction
vehicles, car horns, and (39) pedestrians’ noise on the
busy New York City streets.
Despite these setbacks, Loorya and her team
eventually began to uncover some interesting artifacts. In
2012, the team discovered a foundation wall, a network of
wooden pipes, and several well bases dating to the
eighteenth century. In August 2013, the archaeologists
discovered thousands of objects in a single fifteen-foot
stretch that was likely a garbage disposal (40) site.
Including buttons from Revolutionary War uniforms,
clay pipes, and an imported mineral water bottle from
Germany.
As they cleaned and catalogued the artifacts, the
archaeologists took stock of their findings. The team’s
discoveries provided a snapshot of (41) the various kinds
of construction materials that were used in the eighteenth
century. Colonial-era New Yorkers went to great lengths
to secure fresh drinking water, Loorya noted, given the
(42 )effort involved in laying wooden pipes to bring in
fresh water from surrounding areas, digging very deep
wells, brewing alcohol to mask the water’s salty taste, and
even importing bottled water
Through such discoveries, (43) they tell the story of a
city’s history in a new way. (44) “One of my favorite
things is putting together someone’s life,” Loorya said.