1 . Dry lightning(雷电)can still be harmful even when conditions aren’t so dry, said a study published in Geophysical Research Letters last month. Dry lightning during little to no rainfall was previously thought to cause wildfire danger only with less than 2.5mm of rain in a day. A Washington State University-led study of wildfires in the US West found dry lightning caused wildfires despite up to 7.7 mm of rain.
“The rainfall amounts we recorded should help provide a better understanding of just how much rain can cause a fire risk,” said Dmitri Kalashnikov, lead author of the study.
The researchers analyzed(分析)cases on more than 4,600 naturally caused fires from 2015 to 2020. They matched 3,726 of those to the lightning strikes that likely started them with the help of National Lightning Detection Network.
The study found that 15.3% of those were holdover fires which burn without smoke, bringing about over a hundred fires each year. Analyzing the rainfall amounts around the time of the lightning strikes showed greater rainfall than previously thought among the earlier found fires ranging from 1.7 mm to 4.6 mm.
While humans still cause most fires either by accident or on purpose, lightning-caused wildfires burn the most areas. Nearly 70% of the wildfire-burned land in the West was from lightning-caused fires according to the study. For example, the largest wildfire burn area in California history took place in August 2020 after dry lightning caused many wildfires at once.
Dry lightning can also start wildfires in places that are hard for firefighters to reach. This study found the places where holdover fires happened repeatedly were in the forested mountains of the Southwest as well as the middle and southern Rocky Mountains. Holdover fires cause the problem because they are so hard to notice.
1. The new study found dry lightning can still cause wildfires with a daily rainfall of __________.| A．7.7 mm | B．8.0mm | C．9.4mm | D．10.2mm |
| A．The finding of the research. | B．The number of the cases. |
| C．The process of the study. | D．The designers of the test. |
| A．They are difficult to notice. | B．The fire service is short-handed. |
| C．Campers often smoke there. | D．The locals fail to call firefighters. |
| A．A history textbook. | B．A science magazine. |
| C．A course plan. | D．A book review. |
1. 黑脉金斑蝶的现状；
2. 提出保护原因及措施；
3. 号召保护濒危动物。
注意:
1. 写作词数应为80左右；
2. 请按如下格式在答题卡的相应位置作答。
Protect Monarch Butterflies
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3 . The history of life on earth has been a history of interaction between living things and their surroundings. To a large extent (程度), the physical form and the habits of the earth’s vegetation and its animal life have been shaped by the environment. Considering the whole span of earthly time, the opposite effect, in which life actually modifies its surroundings, has been relatively slight (轻微的). Only in the present century has one species—man got significant power to change the nature of his world.
During the past quarter century this power has not only become increasingly great but it has changed in character. The most alarming of all man’s assaults (侵犯) upon the environment is the contamination (污染) of air, earth, rivers, and sea with dangerous and even deadly materials. This pollution is for the most part irrecoverable. In this now universal contamination of the environment, chemicals are the wicked partners of radiation (辐射) in changing the very nature of the world, the very nature of its life.
It took hundreds of millions of years to produce the life that now lives on the earth. Given time not in years but in millennia (千年), life adjusted and a balance has been reached. But in the modern world there is no time.
I don’t mean that chemical insecticides (杀虫剂) must never be used. However, we have to admit that we have put poisonous and biologically harmful chemicals indiscriminately (恣意地) into the hands of persons largely or wholly ignorant of their possible harm. We have forced enormous numbers of people to contact these poisons, without their permission and often without their knowledge. We admit, furthermore, that we have allowed these chemicals to be used with little or no advance investigation of their effect on soil, water, wildlife, and man himself. Future generations are unlikely to forgive our lack of concern for the integrity (完好无损) of the natural world that supports all life.
1. What does the underlined word “modified” in the first paragraph mean?| A．destroy | B．change | C．explore | D．maintain |
| A．chemicals | B．radiation | C．insecticides | D．vegetation |
| A．Chemicals must not be used for the sake of the environment. |
| B．The environment is greatly affected by vegetation and animals. |
| C．The future generations are likely to lack concern for the environment. |
| D．The pollution of the environment is largely due to irresponsible humans. |
| A．What humans should do with chemicals for future generations. |
| B．How the environment affects the living things on the earth. |
| C．What kind of chemicals are less harmful to the environment. |
| D．How we humans make the best of chemicals to save the earth. |
4 . Research has found that using wood for construction instead of concrete and steel can reduce emissions. But Tim Searchinger at Princeton University says many of these studies are based on the false foundation that harvesting wood is carbon neutral (碳中和). “Only a small percentage of the wood gets into a timber (木料) product, and a part of that gets into a timber product that can replace concrete and steel in a building,” he says. Efficiencies vary in different countries, but large amounts of a harvested tree are left to be divided into parts, used in short-lived products like paper or burned for energy, all of which generate emissions.
In a report for the World Resources Institute, Searchinger and his colleagues have modelled how using more wood for construction would affect emissions between 2010 and 2050, accounting for the emissions from harvesting the wood. They considered various types of forests and parts of wood going towards construction. They also factored in the emissions savings from replacing concrete and steel.
Under some circumstances, the researchers found significant emissions reductions. But each case required what they considered an unrealistically high portion of the wood going towards construction, as well as rapid growth only seen in warmer places, like Brazil. In general, they found a large increase in global demand for wood would probably lead to rising emissions for decades. Accounting for emissions in this way, the researchers reported in a related paper that increasing forest harvests between 2010 and 2050 would add emissions equal to roughly 10 percent of total annual emissions.
Ali Amiri at Aalto University in Finland says the report’s conclusions about emissions from rising demand are probably correct, but the story is different for wood we already harvest. “Boosting the efficiency of current harvests and using more wood for longer-lived purposes than paper would cut emissions,” he says. “We cannot just say we should stop using wood.”
1. What is wrong with previous researches according to Searchinger?| A．They got wrong statistics. | B．They used an incorrect concept. |
| C．They included too many factors. | D．They were applied in limited countries. |
| A．The process of the new research. | B．The background of the new study. |
| C．The challenge of the new research. | D．The achievements of the new study. |
| A．When wood grows slowly. |
| B．When wood is largely used to make paper. |
| C．When wood is largely used in construction in countries like Brazil. |
| D．When wood is largely harvested in countries like Brazil. |
| A．Favorable. | B．Doubtful. | C．Critical. | D．Objective. |
5 . Animals being extinct from the Earth is a serious issue. When this happens in order to use their fur or skin for fashion, it is even worse, since it’s not even for a matter of human survival. That’s why a London zoo decided to make a powerful statement at the Siamese crocodile enclosure (鳄鱼围栏).
When visitors come in expecting to see a crocodile, they’re greeted with the handbag instead, making a very effective and powerful point about illegal wildlife trade and the harm it takes on the species involved.
A sign by the enclosure reads, “This bag used to be found swimming in slow-moving rivers and streams across Southeast Asia and Indonesia. Over the last 75 years, more than 80% of Siamese crocodiles have disappeared. Many, like this one, were hunted for their skins as part of the illegal wildlife trade.”.
Native to parts of Southeast Asia, Siamese crocodiles are critically endangered and have become virtually extinct in the wild. Due to hunting as well as habitat loss, they are now absent from nearly 99% of their original range. A huge part of the decline of population is due to humans using their wetland habitat for rice farming, and things only took a turn for the worse when large-scale hunting for their skin for commercial purposes began in the 1950s.
The particular handbag that is on display at the zoo was confiscated at a UK airport, according to Benjamin Tapley, leader of reptiles and amphibians at ZSL London Zoo.
Tapley told The Huffington Post, “We made this exhibit, within ZSL London Zoo’s Reptile House, to draw visitors’ attention to the destructive impact the Illegal Wildlife Trade (IWT) is having on species around the world. At ZSL, we are working globally with governments and local communities to protect wildlife, support law enforcement (执法) that targets illegal trade networks, empower local communities affected by IWT and reduce demand for threatened wildlife.”
1. Why does the sign say this handbag used to swim?| A．It is made of a crocodile’s skin. |
| B．It is made into a crocodile shape. |
| C．It is light enough to float on water. |
| D．It was kept in flowing river at first. |
| A．Wildly hunting of Siamese crocodiles. |
| B．Destruction of Siamese crocodiles’ habitats. |
| C．Commercial value of Siamese crocodiles. |
| D．Causes to make Siamese crocodiles endangered. |
| A．Seized. | B．Sold. | C．Found. | D．Stolen. |
| A．The importance of wildlife protection. |
| B．The crisis endangered animals are facing. |
| C．The purpose to show the handbag. |
| D．The harm IWT caused. |
6 . There is increasing alarm about the extent of micro plastic pollution, which has been found everywhere from Everest to the Arctic. However, it turns out there’s an even smaller and more poisonous form of plastic pollution entering remote reaches of the globe. A new study published in Environmental Research found significant quantities of nanoplastics in ice samples from both the North and South Poles.
“Now we know that nanoplastics are transported to these comers of the Earth in these quantities. This indicates that nanoplastics are really a bigger pollution problem than we thought,” study lead author Dusan Materic said in a press release.
Nanoplastics are plastics that are smaller than a micrometer in size. Their small size means they are more difficult to study than microplastics, or plastics between five millimeters and a micrometer. But they maybe even more dangerous.
“Nanoplastics are very toxicologically active compared to, for instance, microplastics, and that’s why this is very important” Materic said.
Materic and his team used new methods to measure nanoplastic pollution in ice samples from Greenland and Antarctica. They sampled a 14-meter-deep ice core (核) from the Greenland icecap and sea ice from Antarcia’s McMurdo Sound. They found that there were an average of 13.2 nanograms per milliliter of nanoplastics in the Greenland ice and an average of 52.3 nanograms per milliliter in the Antarctic ice.
But what was even more surprising than the amount of nanoplastics in the remote ice was just how long they had sat there. “In the Greenland core, we see nanoplastic pollution happening all the way from the 1960s. So organisms, despite the lack of the solid evidence, likely all over the world, have been exposed to it for quite some time now,” Materic said.
The study also looked at the types of plastic present in the samples. Half of the Greenland nanoplastics were polyethylene (PE), the kind of plastic used for plastic bags and packaging. A quarter came from tires and a fifth were polyethylene terephthalate (PET), which is, used for clothing and bottles.
1. Why should researchers focus more on nanoplastics?| A．They are more important to science. | B．They are smaller but more dangerous. |
| C．They are easily polluted by ocean water | D．They are more active in cold surroundings. |
| A．The Greenland core. | B．The Antarctic ice. |
| C．The amount of nanoplastics. | D．Nanoplastics pollution. |
| A．The North and South poles are the birthplace of nanoplastics. |
| B．Nanoplastics have less influence on the pa net than microplastics. |
| C．Nanoplastics found in the samples are widely used in the daily life. |
| D．Nanoplastics have been existing since the 1960s throughout the world. |
| A．Microplastics—proving more dangerous. |
| B．Nanoplastics—making its way to the poles. |
| C．Nanoplastics—posing a threat to people’s life. |
| D．Microplastics—setting the alarm bells ringing. |
More than three decades ago, Chu Hongjun, a young man from East China’s Shandong province, traveled to Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region,
The web-savvy (精通网络的) youngster has initiated a project to livestream(直播), 24 hours a day, how the beavers live
Additionally, Chu Wenwen is also willing to take parents and their children on field trips
“We can bridge
8 . In the first test of its kind in Europe, and only the second in the world, Belgian researchers tested 39 brands of straws (吸管) for the group of synthetic (合成的) chemicals known as poly-and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The straws are made from five materials — paper, bamboo, glass, stainless steel and plastic. PFAS were found in the majority of the straws tested and were most common in those made from paper and bamboo. They were not found only in steel straws tested.
PFAS are used to make everyday products, from outdoor clothing to non-stick pans, resistant (抵抗to water, heat and stains. They are, however, potentially harmful to people, wildlife and the environment. They have been related to a number of health problems, including lower response to vaccines (疫苗), lower birth weight, thyroid disease, liver damage, kidney cancer and testicular cancer. They break down very slowly over time and can last thousands of years in the environment, a property that has led to them being known as “forever chemicals”.
A growing number of countries, including the UK and Belgium, have sopped the sale of single-use plastic products, including drinking straws, and plant-based versions have become popular. The PFAS concentrations (浓缩物) were low in them and, bear in mind that most people tend to only use straws occasionally, bringing a limited risk to human health. However, PFAS can remain in the body for many years and concentrations can build up over time.
It isn’t known whether the PFAS were added to the straws by the producer for waterproofing or the PFAS were the result of contamination. Potential sources of contamination include the soil the plant-based materials were grown in and the water used in the production process. However, the presence of the chemicals in almost every brand of paper straws means it is likely that it was, in some cases, being used as a water-resistant coating, say the researchers.
1. Why are PFAS called “forever chemicals”?| A．They are commonly seen in daily life. |
| B．They bring humans health problems. |
| C．They remain in the environment for long. |
| D．They can resist water, heat and stains. |
| A．By bringing people air pollution. |
| B．By polluting humans’ food. |
| C．By building up little by little in humans’ body. |
| D．By making people addicted to drinking easily. |
| A．Pollution. | B．Discovery. | C．Experiment. | D．Development. |
| A．More and more countries give up single-use plastic products. |
| B．PFAS are widely used in the production of daily necessities. |
| C．Certain kinds of new synthetic chemicals were discovered. |
| D．Environment-friendly drinking straws are actually harmful. |
9 . An earthquake can strike without warning. But many injuries and deaths from this kind of natural disaster can be prevented if people follow these safety tips.
If you’re inside a building, stay there! One of the most dangerous things to do in an earthquake is to try to leave a building.
If you are trapped in the ruins, cover your mouth with a handkerchief or a piece of clothing. Use your cellphone to call for help if possible. Don’t shout.
Be prepared for aftershocks
| A．Don’t move about or kick up dost. |
| B．If you’re outside, go to an open space. |
| C．Shouting can cause you to breathe in dust. |
| D．Don’t park your car under a tree or any tall object. |
| E．Take a good hold of your cellphone in the building. |
| F．They can happen in the first hours after the earthquake. |
| G．Most injuries happen when people inside buildings try to get out. |
10 . Animal appear to predict earthquakes by sensing electricity in the air — the first study to find reliable evidence of the phenomenon has shown.
Cameras revealed an “amazing” drop in the number of animals up to 23 days before a major quake hit their rainforest home at Yanachaga National Park in Peru. Lead scientist Dr Rachel Grant, from Anglia Ruskin University, said, “The results showed that just before the earthquake, animals’ activity dropped right down.”
On a normal day the cameras placed around Yanachaga National Park record between 5 and 15 animals. But in the 23 days before the earthquake, the number of animals dropped to five or fewer per day. No animals were photographed at all on five of the seven days immediately before the quake.
Another study showed that animal activity remained normal in the park over a different period when seismic (地震的) activity was low. Co-author, professor Friedemann Freund, said, “The cameras were located at an altitude of 900 meters. If air ionization occurred, the animals would escape to the valley below, where there were fewer positive ions ( 离子). With their ability to sense their environment, animals can help us understand small changes that occur before major earthquakes.”
Other evidence suggested that before the earthquake, the air around the high mountain sites filled with positive ions that can be produced when rocks are placed under stress. Positive ions have been known to cause ill effects in humans as well as animals. Scientists believe the animals were made to feel uncomfortable by the positive ions, leading them to avoid the area. They are thought to have escaped to lower ground, where the air was less ionized. The findings may help experts develop better short-term seismic forecasts.
1. How did scientists conduct the study?| A．By comparing different animals’ habits. |
| B．By observing animals in high mountains. |
| C．By explaining the positive ion phenomenon. |
| D．By analyzing images of animals they obtained. |
| A．The ground at a lower altitude is less ionized. |
| B．Cameras normally record more animals per day. |
| C．Earthquake warnings can be detected in lower places. |
| D．The activity of animals and earthquakes is consistent. |
| A．The findings make for accurate seismic forecast. |
| B．Animals tend to be uneasy with more positive ions. |
| C．Positive ions make humans and animals depressed. |
| D．All the animals remain abnormal before the earthquake. |
| A．Negative Influence of Positive Ions. |
| B．Ions’ Destruction to the Environment. |
| C．Animals’ Behavior Before Earthquakes. |
| D．Creatures’ Ability to Predict Earthquakes. |
