1 . The air is thin and we have to rest several times on the short trip from camp. On the plain (平原), we can just see many wild animals. This is why we're here to observe Tibetan antelopes.
Tibetan antelopes live on the plains of Tibet,Xinjiang and Qinghai.Watch them move slowly across the green grass. I'm attracted by the lovely animals.I'm also reminded of the danger they are in. They are being killed for their valuable fur.
My guide Zhaxi works at the Changtang National Nature Reserve. The reserve is a place for the animals and plants of northwestern Tibet. To Zhaxi, protesting the wildlife is a way of life."We're not tying to save the animals.” he says,"Actually, we're trying to save ourselves."
Between the 1980s and 1990s, the population of the Tibetan antelope dropped by over 50 percent. People were shooting antelopes to make profits. Their living places were becoming smaller as new roads and railways were built.
In order to save the animals, the Chinese government placed them under national protection. Zhaxi and other volunteers watched over the antelopes day and night to keep them safe from attacks. Bridges and gates were added to let the antelopes move easily and keep them safe from cars and trains.
The measures were effective. The antelope population has recovered and in June 2015.the Tibetan antelope was removed from the list of animals in danger. The government, however,does not intend to stop the protection programs, since the threats (威胁) to the Tibetan antelope have not yet disappeared.
Much is being done to protect wildlife but if we really want to save the planet, we must change our way of life. We can stop being a threat to wildlife and to our planet only when we learn to exist in peace with nature.
1. The author went to Tibet in order to .| A．breathe fresh air in Tibet | B．enjoy the scene in Tibet |
| C．learn the history of Tibet | D．observe Tibetan antelopes |
| A．In Tibet. | B．In Xinjiang |
| C．In Qinghai. | D．In Sichuan |
| A．Tibetan antelopes were well protected. |
| B．Tibetan antelopes population dropped |
| C．Tibetan antelopes lived in peace with people |
| D．Tibetan antelopes destroyed new roads and railways, |
| A．Useless | B．basic | C．successful | D．simple |
| A．To kill the Tibetan antelope. | B．To study the Tibetan antelope. |
| C．To watch the Tibetan antelope. | D．To protect the Tibetan antelope. |
2 . NOT that long ago, the world wondered whether clean energy could survive without government support. Now the question is how far it can spread. The number of electric vehicles. which was about 1 million in 2015, last year reached 2 million. In electricity generation, too, trend is with the greens. In the first half of this year wind, solar and hydro generated a record 35% of Germany's power.
Greater success is breeding greater ambition. California is proposing to reach 60% renewable energy by 2030: 176 countries have clean-energy goals. Hawaii, America's most oil-dependent state, has promised to be 100% renewable by the middle of the century. So have 48 poor countries vulnerable to climate change. This week the number of multinationals making a commitment to running their operations on 100% renewable energy rose to 100.
But not every target is helpful. To see why, consider that goal of 100% renewable energy. It makes solving climate change seem easy. In fact, though wind and solar can generate the whole country's electricity some day, renewables still account for less than 8% of the world's total power output. Moreover, cleaning up electricity is only part of the battle. Even though gas-fired heating and cooking can be at least as big a source of greenhouse-gas emissions, renewable heating gets little attention. Transport policy is unpredictable, too. Carmakers may hit their goal of annual sales of 10 million electric vehicles in a decade, but battery-powered road transport, shipping and aviation are dreams. A much-quoted claim that America could rely on wind, solar and hydro alone for its electricity has recently been bitterly criticized by a group of respected academics.
Most importantly, a 100% renewables target confuses means with ends. The priority for the planet is to stop net emissions（净排放量）of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide. Putting too much emphasis on wind, solar and other renewables may block off better carbon-reduction paths. After decades of investment, it is wrong to leave nuclear power off the table. Carbon emissions in Germany actually rose because it chose to phase out nuclear power gradually and so burned more coal. New technologies, such as "direct air capture" systems designed to separate carbon dioxide from the air, may in time prove vital. Likewise, greater energy efficiency could reduce emissions by even more than using renewables would.
1. It can be inferred from the passage that .| A．the problem of climate change will be solved by using 100% renewable energy |
| B．with new technologies, Germany successfully cut down carbon emissions |
| C．it is probable that ships will one day be powered by battery |
| D．America is not likely to completely rely on wind, solar and hydro energy one day |
| A．promoting energy efficiency |
| B．blocking off carbon-reduction paths |
| C．using non-renewable heating |
| D．abandoning electric vehicles |
| A．ignore | B．reduce | C．use | D．invent |
| A．Fashion | B．Politics | C．Economy | D．Education |
3 . Clothing rental is a hot new industry and retailers (零售商) are demanding to get on board in hopes of attracting green shopper.
But is renting fashion actually more environmentally-friendly than buying it, and if so, how much more? Journalist and author Elizabeth Cline investigated (调查) this question and concluded that it's not as sustainable as it seems.
Take shipping, for example, which has to go two ways if an item is rented — receiving and returning. Cline writes that consumer transportation has the second largest carbon footprint of our collective fashion habit after manufacturing.
She writes, ''An item ordered online and then returned can send out 20 kilograms of carbon each way, and increases up to 50 kilograms for rush shipping. By comparison, the carbon impact of a pair of jeans purchased from a physical store and washed and worn at home is 33.4 kilograms, according to a 2015 study by Levi's.''
Then there's the burden of washing, which has to happen for every item when it's returned, regardless of whether or not it was worn. For most rental services, this usually means dry cleaning, a high impact and polluting process. All the rental services that Cline looked into have replaced perchloroethylene (氯乙烯), a carcinogenic (致癌的) air pollutant, still used by 70 percent of US dry cleaners, with alternatives, although these aren't great either.
Lastly, Cline fears that rental services will increase our appetite for fast fashion, simply because it's so easily accessible. There's something called ''share washing'' that makes people waste more precisely because a product or service is shared and thus is regarded as more eco-friendly. Uber is one example of this, advertised as ''a way to share rides and limit ear ownership.'' and yet ''it has been proven to discourage walking,bicycling, and public transportation use.''
Renting clothes is still preferable to buying them cheap and throwing them in the dustbin after a few wears, but we shouldn't let the availability of these services make us too satisfied. There's an even better step — that's wearing what is already in the closet.
1. What is Elizabeth Cline's attitude toward clothing rental?| A．Approving. | B．Unfavorable. |
| C．Objective. | D．Enthusiastic. |
| A．rental services are on the rise |
| B．clothing rental will be as successful as Uber |
| C．renting clothes might waste more than expected |
| D．renting clothes might make people lose interest in fast fashion |
| A．give up renting any clothing |
| B．purchase inexpensive clothes |
| C．rent clothes rather than buy them |
| D．make full use of clothes we've possessed |
| A．Clothing rental is a new fashion. |
| B．Clothing rental is retailers' preference. |
| C．Renting clothes is not that eco-friendly. |
| D．Renting-clothes business is in a dilemma. |
