【推荐3】Marco Springmann and his colleagues, at the Oxford Martin School’s Future of Food Programme, built computer models that predicted what would happen if everyone became vegetarian by 2050. The results indicate that if the world went vegan (严格的素食主义者), the greenhouse gas emissions declines would be around 70%.

In the US, for example, an average family of four emits more greenhouse gases because of the meal they eat than from driving two cars---but it is cars, not steaks, that regularly come up in discussions about global warming.

Food, especially livestock (牲畜，家畜) also takes up a lot of room. 68% of agricultural land in the world is used for livestock. When these lands become grasslands and forests, they would capture carbon dioxide and further ease climate change.

However, if the whole world went vegan, there would be negative effects too. First, it is necessary to keep livestock for environmental purposes. “I’m sitting here in Scotland where the Highlands’ environment is very man-made and based largely on grazing by sheep,” says Peter Alexander, a researcher in socio-ecological systems modeling at the University of Edinburgh. “If we took all the sheep away, the environment would look different and there would be a potential negative impact on biodiversity.”

Plus, meat is an important part of history, tradition and cultural identity. Numerous groups around the world give livestock gifts at weddings, celebratory dinners such as Christmas with turkey or roast beef.

And nowadays, moderation in meal-eating’s frequency and portion size is key to solving these conflicts. “Certain changes would encourage us to make healthier and more environmentally friendly dietary decisions,” says Springmann, “like putting a higher price lag on meat and making fresh fruits and vegetables cheaper.”

In fact, clear solutions already exist for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the livestock industry. What is lacking is the will to carry out those changes.

1. What can we infer from the underlined sentence in the second paragraph?

A．Driving cars is more dangerous than eating steaks in the US.

B．Our dietary choices affecting climate change is often underestimated.

C．People compare the greenhouse gas emissions of the cars and steaks.

D．Cars affect the global warming more seriously than the steaks.

2. Which saying can best show the author’s attitude to livestock?

A．It is hard to please all.

B．Don’t put all your eggs in one basket.

C．One cannot see the wood for the trees.

D．Everything is a double-edged sword.

3. Where is this text most likely from?

A．A biology textbook.	B．A health magazine.
C．A scientific journal.	D．An educational review.

【推荐1】In 2022, campaign group Fashion Revolution Chelsea dye a garden for its Chelsea Flower Show presentation. An ancient craft, natural dyeing is a practice whose time has come again, with hand tie-dyed fashion also making a comeback in recent years.

The revival has been encouraged by Covid lockdowns, “which allowed people to explore the craft at home, says natural-dyeing enthusiast and teacher Susan Dye. It’s unlikely, though, that the practice would have caught on in quite the same way if not for a continually growing discomfort about fashion’s heavy footprint. From carbon emissions to animal cruelty, fashion is under considerable inspection. “Put it this way, 97% of dyes used in the industry are petrochemically (石油化学产品) based,” says sustainable fashion consultant Jackie Andrews, who helped advise the UN Ethical Fashion Initiative. We’ve got net zero targets which mean we’re going to have to remove all those petrochemicals from the manufacturing cycle.

Fashion is a huge polluter. According to the UN Environment Program, the industry is responsible for up to one-fifth of all industrial water pollution—due to the fact that most clothes today are produced in poorer countries where regulation is weak and enforcement weaker. Waste water is dumped directly into rivers and streams, poisoning the land as well as the water sources of people and animals who rely on them.

It’s easy to see why someone who cares about people, planet and animals, as well as clothes, might turn to natural plant dyeing. From the beauty of the raw materials—often wild plants-to the property of only bonding with natural fiber like cotton and linen (亚麻布) from the minor footprint of recycling old clothing that has grayed or faded over time to the vibrant and long-lasting dyeing results, plant dyeing feels like a quiet act of rebellion. This is why, while beginners start with simply changing their clothes’ color, new worlds open. Many of today’s natural dyers grow their own dye plants, run local community workshops, and advocate for change in industrialized fashion systems and beyond.

1. What is the main reason for the growing discomfort mentioned in paragraph 2?

A．The adoption of petrochemical-based dyes

B．The disturbing consequences of the fashion industry.

C．The fashion industry’s focus on luxurious designs.

D．The challenging net zero targets to be achieved.

2. How does the author illustrate Fashion is a huge polluter?

A．By making a comparison.	B．By listing numbers
C．By giving examples.	D．By introducing a new topic

3. What does the underlined phrase a quiet act of rebellion in paragraph 4 refer to?

A．A protest against turning to natural fiber.

B．An objection to recycling old clothing

C．A resistance to vibrant colors in natural dyeing

D．A struggle for a sustainable fashion industry

4. What would be the most suitable title for the passage?

A．The Environmental Impact of Natural Dyeing

B．The Return of Natural Dyeing with Ethical Appeal

C．Fashion Revolution’s Dye Garden Presentation

D．The Petrochemical Dye Industry and Its Challenges

【推荐2】Kids spend a lot of time looking at screens, and some parents worry, but a new study argues against the fears parents may feel.

“The danger is that they’re hearing a message that social media, digital technology use is causing very serious and harmful problems like depression（抑郁症) and suicide-related(与自杀有关的) behaviors. And the idea is that if you shut off social media, which lots of kids use to connect with each other, their friends, find out information about health, you could be making a situation worse. Parents are really being sent a message that is not supported by anything scientifically.” Candice Odgers, professor of psychological science at the University of California, said.

Odgers and her colleagues looked at the screen-related behavior of 400 public-school students in North Carolina aged 10 to 14. This group was picked as a representative sample of race and socioeconomic status for the entire U.S. The researchers found that the kids spent between almost five hours to seven hours per day on their devices, with the older kids online the most. That’s a lot of hours, but:

“Overall, what we find is no connection between the amount of time that young people spend online using digital technologies and mental health symptoms like depression and anxiety. When we do find associations, they were actually quite surprising to us. We found that young people who sent more text messages actually reported better mental health.

Now, again, this was a small association, but it reflects what other people have found: that people who are very connected offline and who use technology in the positive ways to stay connected often, are more connected online as well and experiencing better mental health.”

So why the fears about screen time? Odgers argues that the methodologies for older studies may have led to false conclusions.

“One of the issues with the research that’s been done to date has been that youths are, you know, in school.... They have a survey put in front of them, and they’re asked to recall(想), over the past six months, ‘How often are you online?’and ‘Have you ever felt depressed?’And the correlation (相互关系) between those two things has been used to spread a lot of fear around this connection between social media use and things like depression—99.5 percent of the reasons that kids differ in their depression are due to something other than the time they spend online.”

1. According to Professor Odgers, we know that___________.

A．social media is causing serious problems

B．digital technology is the cause of depression

C．parents are holding wrong ideas about social media

D．parents have showed too much concern for their children

2. Who are the respondents（受访者) of professor Odgers’ team’s research?

A．Kids all over America.

B．Kids and parents in North Carolina.

C．Kids with different family backgrounds.

D．A number of public elementary and middle school students.

3. What can we infer from paragraph 4?

A．The more screen time kids have, the less happy they are.

B．Kids who use social media more are not necessarily depressed.

C．Using digital technology has nothing to do with one’s health.

D．The relationship between digital technology and depression is unclear.

4. The research also tells us___________.

A．technology should be put to good use

B．kids who make more phone calls might be happier

C．we should pay more attention to mental health

D．we should enrich our lives by spending more time offline

5. What does the underlined word “methodologies” refer to?

A．Time and effort.	B．Aim and purpose.
C．Ideas and dreams.	D．Means and principles.

6. The problem with the old research is___________.

A．the sample is too small

B．the respondents are too young

C．not considering the time spent offline

D．deliberately(故意地) linking the Internet to mental issues

【推荐1】Wilderness
“In wilderness(荒野) is the preservation of the world.” This is a famous saying from a writer regarded as one of the fathers of environmentalism. The frequency with which it is borrowed mirrors a heated debate on environmental protection: whether to place wilderness at the heart of what is to be preserved.
As John Sauven of Greenpeace UK points out, there is a strong appeal in images of the wild, the untouched; more than anything else, they speak of the nature that many people value most dearly. The urge to leave the subject of such images untouched is strong, and the danger exploitation(开发) brings to such landscapes(景观) is real. Some of these wildernesses also perform functions that humans need—the rainforests, for example, store carbon in vast quantities. To Mr.Sauven, these ”ecosystem services” far outweigh the gains from exploitation.
Lee Lane, a visiting fellow at the Hudson Institute, takes the opposing view. He acknowledges that wildernesses do provide useful services, such as water conservation. But that is not, he argues, a reason to avoid all human presence, or indeed commercial and industrial exploitation. There are ever more people on the Earth, and they reasonably and rightfully want to have better lives, rather than merely struggle for survival. While the ways of using resources have improved, there is still a growing need for raw materials, and some wildernesses contain them in abundance. If they can be tapped without reducing the services those wildernesses provide, the argument goes, there is no further reason not to do so. Being untouched is not, in itself, a characteristic worth valuing above all others.
I look forwards to seeing these views taken further, and to their being challenged by the other participants. One challenge that suggests itself to me is that both cases need to take on the question of spiritual value a little more directly. And there is a practical question as to whether wildernesses can be exploited without harm.
This is a topic that calls for not only free expression of feelings, but also the guidance of reason. What position wilderness should enjoy in the preservation of the world obviously deserves much more serious thinking.
1. John Sauven holds that_____.

A．many people value nature too much

B．exploitation of wildernesses is harmful

C．wildernesses provide humans with necessities

D．the urge to develop the ecosystem services is strong

2. What is the main idea of Para. 3?

A．The exploitation is necessary for the poor people.

B．Wildernesses cannot guarantee better use of raw materials.

C．Useful services of wildernesses are not the reason for no exploitation.

D．All the characteristics concerning the exploitation should be treated equally.

3. What is the author’s attitude towards this debate?

A．Objective.

B．Disapproving.

C．Sceptical.

D．Optimistic.

4. Which of the following shows the structure of the passage?
CP: Central Point P: Point Sp: Sub-point(次要点) : Conclusion

A．

B．

C．

D．

【推荐2】The age of adulthood is by definition arbitrary. If everyone matured at the same, fixed rate, it wouldn’t be a human process. Indeed, maturation happens at varying speeds across different categories within the same individual, so I’d say I was easily old enough to vote at 16, but nobody should have given me a credit card until I was 32, and I’ve got the county court judgment to prove it.

However, we broadly agree that there’s a difference between a child and an adult, even if we might argue about the transition point. So the political theorist David Runciman’s view that six-year-olds should be allowed to vote goes against any standard argument about the age of civic responsibility. Nobody would say that a six-year-old could be held criminally responsible, could be sent to war, could be capable of consent, could be given responsibility for anything. So allowing them the vote—along with, unavoidably, seven-year-olds who are even sillier, if anything—is quite an amusing proposal.

Runciman’s argument is that this is the only way to rebalance political life, which is currently twisted in favor of the old, who don’t (he added) ever need to demonstrate mental capacity, even long after they’ve lost it.

The first part of his case is self-evident: pensions are protected while children’s centers are closed, concepts such as sovereignty (最高权威) are prioritized over the far more urgent business of the future: climate change. Nostalgia (怀念) for a past the young wouldn’t even recognize plays a central role, which is completely unfair.

Most of the arguments against giving six-year-olds a vote are that children would end up voting for something damaging and chaotic, if someone made unrealistic promises to them, which could never be realized. Well, it’s not children’s fault.

Having said that, children do tend towards the progressive, having a natural sense of justice (which kicks in at the age of six months, psychologists have shown, by creating scenes of great unfairness to babies, and making them cry) and an underdeveloped sense of self-interest. My kid, when he was six, made quite a forceful case against private property, on the basis that, since everybody needed a house, they shouldn’t cost money, because nobody would want anyone else not to have one. Also, food should be free. It was a kind of pre-Marx communism, where you limit the coverage of the market to only those things that you wouldn’t mind someone else not having.

On that particular day, when we were registered as voters, my kid was quite far to the left of me, but in the normal run of things, we’re united, which brings us to the point of the problem: children obey you on almost nothing, but they do seem to believe in your politics until they’re adolescent. So giving kids the vote is really just a way of giving parents extra votes. And what can stop us having even more children, once there’s so much enfranchisement (选举权) in it for us?

Now, if parents could be trusted to use their influence wisely, and hammer into children the politics it will take to assure a better future, then I wouldn’t necessarily have a problem with that, apart from, obviously, that culture is already wildly twisted towards parents, and I can imagine a few non-parents boiling with fierce anger. But that’s not worth talking about anyway, because parents can’t be trusted, otherwise we’d all already vote Green(绿党).

In short: no, six-year-olds should not get the vote; but while we’re here, if any votes come up in the near future, which will have an impact on the next five decades of British political life, alongside EU migrants, 16-year-olds certainly should be enfranchised.

1. The author refers to his age of adulthood to prove that ________.

A．certain rights are granted at different stages of life

B．there’s a common standard for the age of adulthood

C．people mature at different rates in various aspects

D．a credit card is more difficult to get than the vote

2. People reject David Runciman’s proposal because ________.

A．they believe children are far from mature in many ways

B．they are uncertain whether children can assume responsibility

C．they know the age to get the vote is not to be questioned

D．they don’t think a child can grow into adulthood earlier

3. What is the base for David Runciman’s argument?

A．Public ignorance of children’s abilities.	B．Inequalities of opportunity.
C．A cultural preference for the old.	D．The imbalance in political life.

4. The author talks about his kid to indicate that ________.

A．children are in favor of a just society and tend to be idealistic

B．children are innocent and don’t want to be involved in politics

C．children are simple-minded and can fall for an adult’s trick

D．children are good-natured and like to help people in need

5. The author thinks allowing children the vote may lead to ________.

A．twisted culture

B．parents’ objections

C．misuse of rights

D．unusual maturation

6. What is the main point of the passage?

A．There is a difference between adults and children.

B．Allowing children the vote is not altogether absurd.

C．The definition of adulthood is quite controversial.

D．Parents should introduce politics to their children.

【推荐3】When times get tough, we all look for ways to cut back. When we’re hungry, we eat at home instead of going out. We take buses instead of taxis. And we wear our old designer jeans just a few months longer. With college expenses at all-time highs, high school students are eager to do anything to cut the cost of a university education.

One cost-cutting proposal is to allow college students to get a bachelor’s degree in three years instead of four. Educational institutions have been actively exploring ways to make the learning process more efficient. But there’s a question: Would the quality of undergraduate education suffer? Few US universities have formally approved a “three-year degree” model.

I doubt that mainstream North American colleges will carry out a three-year curriculum any time soon. For one thing, most universities already allow highly qualified students to graduate early by testing out of certain classes and obtaining a number of college credits. In addition, at famous universities, the committee who determine which courses are required and which courses are electives are unlikely to suddenly “throw out” one quarter of the required credits. Professors will resist “diluting (稀释)” the quality of the education they offer.

In my opinion, a quality four-year education is always superior to a quality three-year education. A college education requires sufficient time for a student to become skilled in their major and do coursework in fields outside their major. It is not a good idea to water down education, any more than it’s not a good idea to water down medicine. If we want to help students find their way through university, we should help them understand early on what knowledge and skills they need to have upon graduation. We should allow students to test out of as many courses as possible. We should give them a chance to earn money as interns (实习生) in meaningful part-time jobs that relate to their university studies, such as the five-year co-op program at Northeastern University.

1. Which of the following can best sum up the main idea?

A．It’s time to shorten the learning process.

B．Best learning takes place over time.

C．University education should be watered down.

D．College education calls for reform.

2. We can learn from the passage that ________.

A．most American universities are against the “three-year degree” model

B．many famous US universities are considering adopting the “three-year degree” model

C．professors are willing to accept the “three-year degree” model

D．The “three-year degree” model can make college learning more efficient

3. In most US universities，________.

A．college students are offered the co-op program

B．electives’ credits make up one quarter of the required credits

C．all students are required to finish four-year education before graduation

D．some excellent students can graduate ahead of time

4. We can infer that________.

A．the author is a college professor exploring ways to make learning more efficient

B．the author thinks the cost of a university education is too high for people to afford

C．the author considers the university education quality very important

D．the author pays special attention to the all-round development of college students

【推荐1】A young woman sits alone in a café sipping tea and reading a book. She pauses briefly to write in a nearby notepad before showing her words to a passing café waiter: “Where are the toilets please?” This is a familiar scene in Tokyo’s so-called “silent cafés”, where customers are not allowed to speak, and only communicate by writing in notepads.

The concept rises from a desire to be alone among young Japanese, a situation brought by economic uncertainty, a shift in traditional family support structures and the growing social isolation. The phenomenon is not limited to coffee shops but covers everything from silent discos, where participants dance alone wearing wireless headphones connected to the DJ, to products such as small desk tents designed for conversation-free privacy in the office. One Kyoto company even offers single women the opportunity to have a “one woman wedding” — a full bridal affair, complete with white dress and ceremony, and the only thing missing is the groom. The trend has its own media expression — “botchi-zoku”, referring to individuals who consciously choose to do things completely on their own.

One recent weekday afternoon, Chihiro Higashikokubaru, a 23-year-old nurse, travelled 90 minutes from her home, to Tokyo on her day off in order to enjoy some solo time. Speaking quietly at the entrance of the cafe, Miss Higashikokubaru said: “I heard about this place via Twitter and I like the idea of coming here. I work as a nurse and it's always very busy. There are very few quiet places in Tokyo, and it's a big busy city. I just want to come and sit somewhere quietly on my own. I’m going to drink a cup of tea and maybe do some drawings. I like the idea of a quiet, calm atmosphere.”

The desire to be isolated is not a new concept in Japan, home to an estimated 3.6 million “hikikomori” — a more extreme example of social recluses (隐士) who withdraw completely from society.

1. What is special about the “silent cafes”?

A．It provides various tea and books.	B．People are not allowed to communicate.
C．It offers service by writing not by speaking.	D．It has attracted many popular young people.

2. Which of the following brings about the idea of being alone in Japan?

A．The stable economic situation.	B．The increasing social isolation.
C．The rapid development of the Internet.	D．The rising demand for privacy.

3. What do we know about Higashikokubaru?

A．She doesn’t like to be a nurse.	B．She doesn’t like the life in big cities.
C．She enjoys her solo time in a quiet place.	D．She travelled to Tokyo on her work days.

4. What is the best title of the passage?

A．A new concept in Japan	B．Social recluses in Japan
C．Silent cafes	D．Lonely Japanese

【推荐2】EVEN the best of communicators can sometimes hit a wrong note, whether with a joke, turn of phrase, or even an ill-timed chuckle（轻笑）.

For instance, a former finance minister Ken Gabriel usually tries to keep things casual when answering reporters’ questions. But in a television interview on the news program 60 Minutes, some people felt his register was a little too casual—even careless.

At one point, Gabriel spoke about the bankers who have been widely blamed for causing the collapse of the financial sector: “I mean there were a whole bunch of folks who, on paper, if you looked at quarterly reports, were wildly successful, selling derivatives that turned out to be …completely worthless,” Gabriel said, with a chuckle.

Shocked by Gabriel’s laughter during the interview, journalist David finally asked: “You’re sitting here. And you’ re—you are laughing. You are laughing about some of these problems.”

Gabriel quickly explained himself by replying, “No, no. There’s gotta be a little humor to get you through the day.” But that exchange ended up making news, as TV pundits, journalists and public relations experts debated Gabriel’s tone.

One unnamed strategist for Gabriel’ s party said that the finance minister’ s attempts at humor were distracting: “Gabriel is gifted in so many ways, but humor is not something that he seems to be comfortable with. He does not come across as a funny guy.”

The TV critic Daniel, meanwhile, came to Gabriel’s defense.

“Gabriel isn’t a rookie …All this laughter seems clearly to be calculated rather than accidental. His laughs last night were designed as laughs of reassurance. They were designed to tell the TV audience he understands the severity of the situation.”

There would have been little debate if Gabriel had not laughed during a speech. Answering questions in a public setting, however, should allow for a more conversational register. But as Gabriel discovered, not everyone agrees on just how casual the tone should be.

1. What’s the meaning of the phrase hit a wrong note?

A．Say something wrong.	B．Do something wrong.
C．Write down something wrongly.	D．Play the music wrongly.

2. What did Gabriel do when journalist David asked him about the laughter?

A．Tried to account for it.	B．Found an excuse for it.
C．Refused to say anything about it.	D．Learned a lesson from it.

3. Which of the following stands by Gabriel?

A．The banker.	B．David.
C．The unnamed strategist.	D．Daniel.

4. Which of the following may be the best title for the passage?

A．Debatable speeches of Gabriel.	B．Be cautious while you are speaking.
C．Gabriel’s rude behavior in speeches.	D．Honest or not, it’s hard to say.

【推荐3】In the first days after a team of 25 delivery robots landed on George Mason University's campus in January,they appeared to cause curious glances and many photos but not much else.

It was clear,officials said,that more time and more data would be necessary to understand whether the robots would change the campus culture or become forgettable.Two months later,an extra 1,500 breakfast orders have been delivered autonomously,according to the technologists of Sodexo,a company that manages food service for GMU and works closely with the robots.

Research has shown that up to 88 percent of college students skip breakfast,primarily because of lack of time,but that number is starting to turn around when delivery robots arrive on campus.They're constantly seen making the 15 minute trip from campus restaurant to a handful of nearby dorms,as well as to other buildings across campus,where students meet them.Two months later,breakfast has replaced dinner as the go-to meal for robot delivery.

Sodexo officials have noted that college students are main users of food delivery apps and place a high value on convenience and multiple options when they dine.During the morning hours,restaurant experts say,there is generally more emphasis（强调）on speed than any other part of the day.Combine college students'love of food delivery with messy morning routines,and perhaps they have a perfect recipe for robots to deliver in the campus.

The robots also provide campus officials with valuable data showing how meal plans are being used,which could lead to changes in how the university serves students over time.Sodexo technologists also announced Monday that a new team of more than 30 robots is launching at Northern Arizona University.

1. Why don't most college students have breakfast according to the research?

A．They are on diets.

B．They have a tight schedule.

C．The food doesn't agree with them.

D．GMU doesn't offer delivery services.

2. What does the underlined word"they"in Para 4 refer to?

A．College students.	B．Campus officials.
C．College professors.	D．Restaurant managers.

3. What do we know about the first 25 delivery robots?

A．They make timely deliveries.

B．They were ignored at first.

C．They mainly carry dinner at present.

D．They have changed the whole campus culture.

4. What's the beat title for the text?

A．Delivery services grow fast in college.

B．Breakfast in necessary for college students.

C．Robots help with GMU's campus management.

D．Delivery robots are changing students'eating habits.