Where are the bees?
Bees are essential to the production of food we eat. Bees make honey, but they also pollinate large areas of crops, such as straw berries, apples and onions. About a third of the food we eat is a result of pollination of the bees. Unfortunately, bees have been disappearing at an alarming rate.
In 2006, bee keepers started reporting about something called Colony Collapse Disaster (CCD).The main sign of CCD is the loss of adult honey bees from a hive. In October of 2006, some beekeepers reported that they had lost between 30 and 90 percent of their hives.
There were many theories for the disappearance of the bees. But the most convincing one has to do with pesticides and lifestyles of bees today. Nowadays, beekeeper get most of their income not from producing honey but from renting bees to pollinate plants. This means that the life of the typical bee now consists of travelling all around the country to pollinate crops as the seasons change. That means a lot of traveling on trucks, which is very stressful to bees. It is not unusual for up to 30% of the hive to die during transport due to stress. In addition, bees that spend most of their time locked up on trucks are not exposed to what they usually live on. Instead, they live on a sweet liquid from corn, usually polluted with pesticides.
The exact reason for the disappearance of bees is not sure, but losing bees is very costly to the economy. The bee pollination services are worth over $8 billion a year. With no bees, pollination will have to be done by hand, which would have effects on the quality of food and increased food priced. We hear a lot about big environmental disasters almost every day. But one of the biggest may just be the less of that tiny flying insect.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2 . Everything about nuclear energy seems terrifically big: the cost, construction and decommissioning—and the fears of something going badly wrong.
The future, however may well be much smaller. Dozens of companies are working on a new generation of reactors that, they promise, can deliver nuclear power at lower cost and reduced risk.
These small-scale plants will on average generate between 50MW and 300MW of power compared with the 1,000MW-plus from a conventional reactor. They will draw on modular manufacturing techniques that will reduce construction risk, which has plagued larger-scale projects. Supporters believe these advanced modular reactors (AMRs)—most of which will not be commercial until the 2030s—are critical if atomic power is to compete against the rapidly falling costs of solar and wind.
“The physics hasn’t changed. It’s about much cleverer design that offers much-needed flexibility in terms of operation,” said Tim Stone, long-term industry adviser and chairman of Nuclear risk Insurers, which insures nuclear sites in the UK.
Since the Fukushima meltdown in Japan in 2011, safety fears have threatened nuclear power. But the biggest obstacle today is economic. In western Europe, just three plants are under construction: in the UK at Hinkley point C in Somerset; at Flamanville in France; and at Olkiluoto in Finland. All involve the European Pressurized Reactor technology of EDF that will be used at Hinkley Point. All are running years late and over budget. In the US, the first two nuclear projects under way for the past 30 years are also blowing through cost estimates.
The UK, which opened the world’s first commercial nuclear reactor in 1956, is one of the few western nations committed to renewing its ageing fleet to ensure energy security and meet tough carbon reduction targets. It is seen as a proving ground, by many in the industry, of nuclear power’s ability to restore confidence.
However, the country’s agreement with EDF to build two units at Hinkley Point—which together will generate 3.2GW of electricity—has come under severe criticism over its cost. The government is looking at different funding models but said it still sees nuclear power as vital to the country’s future energy mix. Small reactors, it believes, have the potential to generate much-needed power from the 2030s.
A nuclear sector deal, unveiled last month, promised up to ￡56m in funding for research and development into AMRs and attracted interest of start-ups from around the world. The government hopes the funding will give the UK a lead in the global race to develop these technologies, helping to provide energy security while also creating a multibillion-dollar export market for British engineering companies.
1. Which of the following is true about the advanced modular reactors (AMRs)?| A．AMRs produce more power than traditional reactors |
| B．Small in scale, AMRs rose more safety risks |
| C．So far, most AMRs have not been put into use yet |
| D．Governments prefer energy of solar and wind to that of AMRs |
| A．prove that nuclear power has been threatened by safety concern. |
| B．show that the construction of nuclear power plants cost more that the budget available. |
| C．indicate the construction of nuclear plants are slow in speed. |
| D．point out that most power plants have adopted the latest nuclear technology. |
| A．Some people have lost confidence in the development of nuclear plants |
| B．The UK government seeks to reduce the negative impact of nuclear power on its economy. |
| C．The plan to build two power plants in Hinkley Point has been deserted |
| D．a kind costs for small modular reactors would be higher relative to large nuclear reactors. |
| A．Britain counts on nuclear energy to keep lights on |
| B．Traditional nuclear plants boom with mini reactors |
| C．Nuclear’s share of power generation remain stead |
| D．Nuclear power looks to shrink its way to success |
