1 . When John Todd was a child, he loved to explore the woods around his house, observing how nature solved problems. A dirty stream, for example, often became clear after flowing through plants and along rocks where tiny creatures lived. When he got older, John started to wonder if this process could be used to clean up the messes people were making.
After studying agriculture, medicine, and fisheries in college, John went back to observing nature and asking questions. Why can certain plants trap harmful bacteria (细菌)? Which kinds of fish can eat cancer-causing chemicals? With the right combination of animals and plants, he figured, maybe he could clean up waste the way nature did. He decided to build what he would later call an eco-machine.
The task John set for himself was to remove harmful substances from some sludge (污泥). First, he constructed a series of clear fiberglass tanks connected to each other. Then he went around to local ponds and streams and brought back some plants and animals. He placed them in the tanks and waited. Little by little, these different kinds of life got used to one another and formed their own ecosystem. After a few weeks, John added the sludge.
He was amazed at the results. The plants and animals in the eco-machine took the sludge as food and began to eat it! Within weeks, it had all been digested, and all that was left was pure water.
Over the years, John has taken on many big jobs. He developed a greenhouse — like facility that treated sewage (污水) from 1,600 homes in South Burlington. He also designed an eco-machine to clean canal water in Fuzhou, a city in southeast China.
“Ecological design” is the name John gives to what he does. “Life on Earth is kind of a box of spare parts for the inventor,” he says. “You put organisms in new relationships and observe what’s happening. Then you let these new systems develop their own ways to self-repair.”
1. What can we learn about John from the first two paragraphs?| A．He was fond of traveling. | B．He enjoyed being alone. |
| C．He had an inquiring mind. | D．He longed to be a doctor. |
| A．To feed the animals. | B．To build an ecosystem. |
| C．To protect the plants. | D．To test the eco-machine. |
| A．To review John’s research plans. | B．To show an application of John’s idea. |
| C．To compare John’s different jobs. | D．To erase doubts about John’s invention. |
| A．Nature can repair itself. | B．Organisms need water to survive. |
| C．Life on Earth is diverse. | D．Most tiny creatures live in groups. |
2 . You’ve heard that plastic is polluting the oceans — between 4.8 and 12.7 million tonnes enter ocean ecosystems every year. But does one plastic straw or cup really make a difference? Artist Benjamin Von Wong wants you to know that it does. He builds massive sculptures out of plastic garbage, forcing viewers to re-examine their relationship to single-use plastic products.
At the beginning of the year, the artist built a piece called “Strawpocalypse,” a pair of 10-foot-tall plastic waves, frozen mid-crash. Made of 168,000 plastic straws collected from several volunteer beach cleanups, the sculpture made its first appearance at the Estella Place shopping center in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Just 9% of global plastic waste is recycled. Plastic straws are by no means the biggest source (来源) of plastic pollution, but they’ve recently come under fire because most people don’t need them to drink with and, because of their small size and weight, they cannot be recycled. Every straw that’s part of Von Wong’s artwork likely came from a drink that someone used for only a few minutes. Once the drink is gone, the straw will take centuries to disappear.
In a piece from 2018, Von Wong wanted to illustrate (说明) a specific statistic: Every 60 seconds, a truckload’s worth of plastic enters the ocean. For this work, titled “Truckload of Plastic,” Von Wong and a group of volunteers collected more than 10,000 pieces of plastic, which were then tied together to look like they’d been dumped (倾倒) from a truck all at once.
Von Wong hopes that his work will also help pressure big companies to reduce their plastic footprint.
1. What are Von Wong’s artworks intended for?| A．Beautifying the city he lives in. | B．Introducing eco-friendly products. |
| C．Drawing public attention to plastic waste. | D．Reducing garbage on the beach. |
| A．To show the difficulty of their recycling. |
| B．To explain why they are useful. |
| C．To voice his views on modern art. |
| D．To find a substitute for them. |
| A．Calming. | B．Disturbing. |
| C．Refreshing. | D．Challenging. |
| A．Artists’ Opinions on Plastic Safety |
| B．Media Interest in Contemporary Art |
| C．Responsibility Demanded of Big Companies |
| D．Ocean Plastics Transformed into Sculptures |
3 . Washington, D.C. Bicycle Tours
Cherry Blossom Bike Tour in Washington, D.C.
Duration: 3 hours
This small group bike tour is a fantastic way to see a world-famous cherry trees with beautiful flowers of Washington, D.C. Your guide will provide a history lesson about the trees and the famous monuments where they blossom. Reserve your spot before availability — the cherry blossoms—disappear!
Washington Capital Monuments Bicycle Tour
Duration: 3 hours (4 miles)
Join a guided bike tour and view some of the most popular monuments in Washington, D.C. Explore the monuments and memorials on the National Mall as your guide shares unique facts and history at each stop. Guided tour includes bike, helmet, cookies and bottled water.
Capital City Bike Tour In Washington, D.C.
Duration: 3 hours
Morning or Afternoon, this bike tour is the perfect tour for D. C. newcomers and locals looking to experience Washington, D.C. in a healthy way with minimum effort. Knowledgeable guides will entertain you with the most, interesting stories about Presidents, Congress, memorials, and parks. Comfortable bikes and a smooth tour route(路线) make cycling between the sites fun and relaxing.
Washington Capital Sites at Night Bicycle Tour
Duration: 3 hours (7miles)
Join a small group bike tour for an evening of exploration in the heart of Washington, D.C. Get up close to the monuments and memorials as you bike the sites of Capitol Hill and the National Mall. Frequent stops are made for photo taking as your guide offers unique facts and history. Tour includes bike, helmet, and bottled water. All riders are equipped with reflective vests and safety lights.
1. Which tour do you need to book in advance?| A．Cherry Blossom Bike Tour in Washington, D.C. |
| B．Washington Capital Monuments Bicycle Tour. |
| C．Capital City Bike Tour in Washington. |
| D．Washington Capital Sites at Night Bicycle Tour. |
| A．Meet famous people. | B．Go to a national park. |
| C．Visit well-known museums. | D．Enjoy interesting stories. |
| A．City maps. | B．Cameras. |
| C．Meals. | D．Safety lights. |
4 . We may think we're a culture that gets rid of our worn technology at the first sight of something shiny and new, but a new study shows that we keep using our old devices(装置) well after they go out of style. That’s bad news for the environment — and our wallets — as these outdated devices consume much more energy than the newer ones that do the same things.
To figure out how much power these devices are using, Callie Babbitt and her colleagues at the Rochester Institute of Technology in New York tracked the environmental costs for each product throughout its life — from when its minerals are mined to when we stop using the device. This method provided a readout for how home energy use has evolved since the early 1990s. Devices were grouped by generation — Desktop computers, basic mobile phones, and box-set TVs defined 1992. Digital cameras arrived on the scene in 1997. And MP3 players, smart phones, and LCD TVs entered homes in 2002, before tablets and e-readers showed up in 2007.
As we accumulated more devices, however, we didn't throw out our old ones. "The living-room television is replaced and gets planted in the kids' room, and suddenly one day, you have a TV in every room of the house," said one researcher. The average number of electronic devices rose from four per household in 1992 to 13 in 2007. We're not just keeping these old devices — we continue to use them. According to the analysis of Babbitt's team, old desktop monitors and box TVs with cathode ray tubes are the worst devices with their energy consumption and contribution to greenhouse gas emissions（排放）more than doubling during the 1992 to 2007 window.
So what's the solution（解决方案）? The team's data only went up to 2007, but the researchers also explored what would happen if consumers replaced old products with new electronics that serve more than one function, such as a tablet for word processing and TV viewing. They found that more on-demand entertainment viewing on tablets instead of TVs and desktop computers could cut energy consumption by 44%.
1. What does the author think of new devices?| A．They are environment-friendly. | B．They are no better than the old. |
| C．They cost more to use at home. | D．They go out of style quickly. |
| A．To reduce the cost of minerals. |
| B．To test the life cycle of a product. |
| C．To update consumers on new technology. |
| D．To find out electricity consumption of the devices. |
| A．The box-set TV. | B．The tablet. |
| C．The LCD TV. | D．The desktop computer. |
| A．Stop using them. | B．Take them apart. |
| C．Upgrade them. | D．Recycle them. |
5 . Early fifth-century philosopher St．Augustine famously wrote that he knew what time was unless someone asked him．Albert Einstein added another wrinkle when he theorized that time varies depending on where you measure it．Today's state-of-the-art atomic（原子的） clocks have proven Einstein right．Even advanced physics can't decisively tell us what time is, because the answer depends on the question you're asking．
Forget about time as an absolute．What if，instead of considering time in terms of astronomy,we related time to ecology？What if we allowed environmental conditions to set the tempo（节奏） of human life？We're increasingly aware of the fact that we can't control Earth systems with engineering alone，and realizing that we need to moderate（调节）our actions if we hope to live in balance．What if our definition of time reflected that？
Recently，I conceptualized a new approach to timekeeping that's connected to circumstances on our planet，conditions that might change as a result of global warming．We're now building a clock at the Anchorage Museum that reflects the total flow of several major Alaskan rivers，which are sensitive to local and global environmental changes．We've programmed it to match an atomic clock if the waterways continue to flow at their present rate．If the rivers run faster in the future on average，the clock will get ahead of standard time．If they run slower，you'll see the opposite effect．
The clock registers both short-term irregularities and long-term trends in river dynamics．It's a sort of observatory that reveals how the rivers are behaving from their own temporal frame（时间框架），and allows us to witness those changes on our smartwatches or phones．Anyone who opts to go on Alaska Mean River Time will live in harmony with the planet．Anyone who considers river time in relation to atomic time will encounter a major imbalance and may be motivated to counteract it by consuming less fuel or supporting greener policies．
Even if this method of timekeeping is novel in its particulars，early agricultural societies also connected time to natural phenomena．In pre-Classical Greece，for instance，people“corrected”official calendars by shifting dates forward or backward to reflect the change of season．Temporal connection to the environment was vital to their survival．Likewise，river time and other timekeeping systems we're developing may encourage environmental awareness．
When St．Augustine admitted his inability to define time， he highlighted one of time 's most noticeable qualities：Time becomes meaningful only in a defined context．Any timekeeping system is valid，and each is as praiseworthy as its purpose．
1. What is the main idea of Paragraph 1？| A．Timekeeping is increasingly related to nature． |
| B．Everyone can define time on their own terms． |
| C．The qualities of time vary with how you measure it． |
| D．Time is a major concern of philosophers and scientists． |
| A．present an assumption | B．evaluate an argument |
| C．highlight an experiment | D．introduce an approach |
| A．Those who do not go on river time will live an imbalanced life． |
| B．New ways of measuring time can help to control Earth systems． |
| C．Atomic time will get ahead of river time if the rivers run slower． |
| D．Modern technology may help to shape the rivers’ temporal frame． |
| A．It is crucial to improve the definition of time． |
| B．A fixed frame will make time meaningless． |
| C．We should live in harmony with nature． |
| D．History is a mirror reflecting reality． |
6 . California has lost half its big trees since the 1930s, according to a study to be published Tuesday and climate change seems to be a major factor(因素).
The number of trees larger than two feet across has declined by 50 percent on more than 46, 000 square miles of California forests, the new study finds. No area was spared or unaffected, from the foggy northern coast to the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the San Gabriels above Los Angeles. In the Sierra high country, the number of big trees has fallen by more than 55 percent; in parts of southern California the decline was nearly 75 percent.
Many factors contributed to the decline, said Patrick McIntyre, an ecologist who was the lead author of the study. Woodcutters targeted big trees. Housing development pushed into the woods. Aggressive wildfire control has left California forests crowded with small trees that compete with big trees for resources(资源).
But in comparing a study of California forests done in the 1920s and 1930s with another one between 2001 and 2010, McIntyre and his colleagues documented a widespread death of big trees that was evident even in wildlands protected from woodcutting or development.
The loss of big trees was greatest in areas where trees had suffered the greatest water shortage. The researchers figured out water stress with a computer model that calculated how much water trees were getting in comparison with how much they needed, taking into account such things as rainfall, air temperature, dampness of soil, and the timing of snowmelt(融雪).
Since the 1930s, McIntyre said, the biggest factors driving up water stress in the state have been rising temperatures, which cause trees to lose more water to the air, and earlier snowmelt, which reduces the water supply available to trees during the dry season.
1. What is the second paragraph mainly about?| A．The seriousness of big-tree loss in California. |
| B．The increasing variety of California big trees. |
| C．The distribution of big trees in California forests. |
| D．The influence of farming on big trees in California. |
| A．Ecological studies of forests. |
| B．Banning woodcutting. |
| C．Limiting housing development. |
| D．Fire control measures. |
| A．Inadequate snowmelt. | B．A longer dry season. |
| C．A warmer climate. | D．Dampness of the air. |
| A．California’s Forests: Where Have All the Big Trees Gone? |
| B．Cutting of Big Trees to Be Prohibited in California Soon |
| C．Why Are the Big Trees Important to California Forests? |
| D．Patrick McIntyre: Grow More Big Trees in California |
7 . Slowness has been a sweeping trend in sustainability. Slow food celebrates local produce and traditional cooking methods; slow fashion is made with a focus on people and the planet. You may have even heard of the slow city, a campaign to restore local cultures and turn cities back to their natural environments.
Slow design developed from the larger slow movement. Although the term was only recently introduced, the idea of thoughtful design looks back to a time when buildings and furniture were made with great craftsmanship (手艺) and by hand-before the mass-produced throwaway furniture took over. You can think of the term “slow” as a celebration of timelessness: both the timelessness of a piece and the timelessness of the relationship between that piece and its owner.
One example of slow design today is what’s been dubbed the brown furniture revival (复兴). Brown furniture refers to the heavy wooden furnishings that were popular in your grandparents’ day but suddenly fell out of style at the turn of the century. Brown furniture is often associated with dark woods, such as trees like mahogany, walnut, and teak, that take decades to reach maturity and true craftsmanship to transform into functional pieces.
Today’s furniture industry is dominated by the $13.1 billion-and-growing global ready-to-assemble(RTA) furniture market. RTA furniture is usually constructed from low-quality fiberboard, which lasts a small part of traditional furniture’s lifespan (寿命).The weight of furniture landfilled in 2018 was 9. 7 million tons, 4. 5 times what was landfilled in 1960.
In a less direct way, the idea of timelessness also lends itself to a lower environmental impact. Besides their demonstrated physical durability, slow materials and design are meant to outlive trends and never be thrown out simply because they’re out of style.
As second-hand shopping becomes more appealing to today’s young generation-because of its low environmental impact and affordability-the brown furniture of yesteryear is making a comeback.
1. Why is the first paragraph written?| A．To explain a new term. |
| B．To present the topic of the text. |
| C．To provide background information. |
| D．To highlight the importance of slowness. |
| A．Known as. |
| B．Mistaken for. |
| C．Compared to. |
| D．Connected with. |
| A．It is out of date. |
| B．It has a long lifespan. |
| C．It is heavy and expensive. |
| D．It has bad effects on the environment. |
| A．Grandparents are buying new furniture. |
| B．The brown furniture will soon be mass-produced. |
| C．The young generation favors second-hand shopping. |
| D．Materials for slow design furniture are more available. |
8 . Koko the gorilla knew over 1,000 signs based on American Sign Language, and used them to do everything from asking for food to joking around. Her trainer and long-term companion, Penny Patterson, thought Koko went further still, signing in novel ways and showing complex emotions. According to Ms Patterson, when a cat that Koko loved was killed in an accident, Koko signed: “Cat, cry, have-sorry, Koko-love.” When Koko died last month, some of her obituaries (讣告) mourned the gorilla who had “mastered American sign language.”
Then came the backlash, from linguists and experts in sign languages. Sign languages have complex grammars, equivalent to spoken tongues in expressiveness. Koko’s ability, it was pointed out, fell well short of a fluent human signer. Moreover, Ms Patterson was her interpreter, a role that invited the question of how much she was inferring what Koko “must have meant,” and explaining away random signs. It was hard to be sure: Ms Patterson preferred speaking to journalists over sharing her video and raw data about Koko with fellow researchers.
There is no doubt that animals communicate. Animals from one region can share sounds that differ from groups in another, leading researchers to talk of animal “dialects.” Then there are the remarkable achievements of Koko and her primate predecessors, including a chimp delightfully named Nim Chimpsky. Yet there is an important distinction between communication and language. Take the misleading term “body language.” It is sometimes claimed that words convey just 7% of meaning, and that body language and tone of voice do the rest. This wildly overstretches an old study which found that most emotional messaging — as opposed to the propositional kind — comes from tone and body language, especially when a neutral word such as “maybe” was used. But try conveying a fact like “It will rain on Tuesday” with your eyebrows, and the difference becomes clear. Language allows for clear statements, questions and commands.
Nim Chimpsky’s near-namesake, Noam Chomsky, has argued that people have a kind of “universal grammar”, and that all humankind’s languages are mere variations on a theme. Mr Chomsky has changed his mind repeatedly on what constitutes the core of human language, but one obvious candidate is syntax — rules, not just words, which allow the construction of a huge variety of meaningful utterances (所说的话). This capacity may even be infinite. Any statement in English, for example, can be made longer by adding “He said that …” at the beginning. This property is called recursion: a simple statement (“It’s cold”) is embedded in a more complicated one (“He said that it’s cold”). Human syntax also allows for hypotheticals (“If she hadn’t arrived …”), talking precisely about events distant from the present, and so much more.
That gorillas lack syntax should not blind humans to their magnificence. But the fact that Koko could communicate should not mislead observers into thinking she possessed language.
1. Which statement about KOKO the gorilla is true?| A．Koko’s ability was similar to a fluent human signer. |
| B．Koko could ask for food using sign language. |
| C．Koko was able to show complex feelings using sign language. |
| D．Koko was killed in an accident. |
| A．approval | B．bias | C．opposition | D．evidence |
| A．Koko was not as expressive as a human signer |
| B．Koko seldom needed an interpreter |
| C．Koko was able to communicate with journalists |
| D．Koko failed to speak several animal “dialects” |
| A．Humans can express past events using language while apes cannot. |
| B．Tone and body language play a dominant role in human communication. |
| C．Words enable humans to convey clear meanings. |
| D．Gorillas are still magnificent in terms of their ability to communicate. |
| A．Nim Chimpsky and Noam Chomsky — Who Has the Upper Hand? |
| B．Syntax — What Separates Humans and Apes. |
| C．Koko the Gorilla — A Magnificent Communicator. |
| D．Great Apes — Language and Communication Are Not the Same Thing. |
9 . A six-year-old longing to keep a unicorn in her backyard figured she’d get the hard part out of the way first.
Last November, Madeline wrote a letter to the Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control with a straightforward request. “Dear LA County, I would like your approval if I can have a unicorn in my backyard if I can find one. Please send me a letter in response.”
Director Mayeda replied two weeks later. The department does in fact license unicorns, she said, under certain conditions. Those include polishing the unicorn’s horn at least once a month with a soft cloth, feeding it watermelon at least once a week, covering it with only nontoxic and biodegradable sparkles and giving it regular access to sunlight, moonbeams and rainbows. And, because unicorns are indeed very rare to find, the department is also giving Madeline a toy unicorn to keep her company during her search, as a token of appreciation.
“It is always rewarding to hear from young people who thoughtfully consider the requirements of providing a loving home for animals,” Mayeda wrote in the letter. “I like your sense of responsible pet ownership to seek permission in advance to keep a unicorn in Los Angeles County.”
Mayeda told the Washington Post that this is the first time the department has received a request for a license for a unicorn or any mythical creature. They were impressed with the first-grader for wanting to ask permission in the first place, and doing her research to work out how to go about that. She and her colleagues deal with a lot of “life-and-death” issues on the job, whether that’s seeing cases of animal abuse or animals hurting people or making decisions about having to put down dangerous or sick animals. So Madeline’s letter has considerably brightened their spirits, and she is due to visit the department this week to discuss her unicorn license application. Safe to say, she’s in for a magical surprise.
1. Why did Madeline write the letter?| A．To apply to visit a unicorn. | B．To learn to provide animal care. |
| C．To ask permission to keep a pet. | D．To figure out how to find a unicorn. |
| A．Her application was disapproved. | B．Requirements should be met for the license. |
| C．She was presented with a live unicorn. | D．Guidance was given for her search. |
| A．Imaginative. | B．Sensitive. | C．Flexible. | D．Convincing. |
| A．Because it is the first application letter for a pet. |
| B．Because animal protection is a life-and-death issue. |
| C．Because they are worn out with their daily work. |
| D．Because they are touched with the girl’s deeds. |
10 . Wild animals are equipped with a variety of techniques to avoid becoming lunch for a bigger animal, also known as a predator (捕食者) in nature. The most well-known methods include the classic fight and flight as well as freeze.
A team of researchers wondered whether closeness to people might impact those survival strategies. “We often see that animals are more tolerant around us in urban areas, but we don’t really know why.” says evolutionary biologist Dan Blumstein. “Is it individual plasticity, meaning individuals change their fear of us and that leads to tolerance? Or can there be an evolutionary factor involved?”
To find out, Blumstein and his colleagues combined information from 173 studies of over 100 species, including mammals, birds, fish and even mollusks. It turns out that regardless of evolutionary ancestry, the animals react in a similar way to life among humans: they lose their anti-predator characteristics. That pattern is especially pronounced for plant-eating animals and for social species. This behavioral change is perhaps unsurprising when it’s intentional, the result of domestication or controlled breeding. But it turns out that urbanization alone results in a similar change, though around three times more slowly.
The main point is: we’re essentially domesticating animals by urbanization. We’re selecting for the same sorts of characteristics that we would if we were actually trying to domesticate them. If the urbanization process helps animals better co-exist with people, it could be to their benefit. But if it makes them more defenseless to their nonhuman predators, it could be a real problem. Either way, these results mean that city living has enough of an influence on wild animals that evolutionary processes kick in. Those reductions in anti-predator characteristics become encoded in their genes. We’re changing the population genetics one way or another.
What the researchers now wonder is whether the mere presence of tourists in less urbanized areas can cause similar changes in wild animals. If so, serious questions exist for the idea of ethical, welfare-oriented eco-tourism. If we wish to help animals keep their anti-predator defenses, the researchers say, we might have to intentionally expose animals to predators. It’s just yet one other way that we’re changing the world around us.
1. The research led by Blumstein is aimed at ________.| A．determining how animals’ survival is impacted by individual plasticity |
| B．studying how living among humans affects animals’ survival strategies |
| C．comparing the effectiveness of different survival techniques |
| D．finding out which evolutionary factor impacts animals’ survival methods |
| A．Controlled breeding of animals. | B．Banning the operation of eco-tourism. |
| C．Planned selection of favorable genes. | D．Eliminating domestication. |
| A．Urbanization has made wild animals more alert. |
| B．Urbanization has brought concrete benefits to animals. |
| C．City living has led to animals’ genetic variations. |
| D．City living has helped to preserve animal species. |
| A．expose the fox to the urban environment repeatedly |
| B．train the fox to co-exist with the less aggressive predators |
| C．intentionally get the fox accustomed to the presence of humans |
| D．purposefully adapt the fox to predator related environment |
