1 . During the recent elections，the Inuit Ataqatigiit, a left-wing Greenland party，has won against the incumbent (现任的) center-left Siumut party. The Inuit Atagatigiit heavily campaigned against the construction of a rare earth metal mine，a project whose development has been contested for years.
The project would give the mine the “potential to become the most significant Western world producer of rare earths” according to the Australian company behind the project, Greenland Minerals. However, it comes at the expense of poisonous waste products that could damage the area’s fragile ecosystem.
Rare earth metals are found everywhere. From cellphones to magnets and even DVDs, rare earth metals are used for making many electronic products. For years, international mining companies have had their sights on Greenland. The country is known for its abundant deposits of untapped rare earth minerals.
The main mining project that became the center of the recent election is in an area south of Greenland known as Kvanefjeld. It has deposits of rare earths and uranium, and has been in development for years. But it has never been officially approved by the government due to heavy opposition for the radioactive waste it would produce.
On the other side of the coin, supporters of the project argue for the economic benefits it would provide such as creating thousands of jobs. Greenland’s economy, is mainly dependent on fishing and financial support from Denmark, the country that owns it. Many rare earth metals are also important for developing renewable sources of energy that can address climate change.
Immediately after the victory of the Inuit Ataqatigiit party was announced, the leader of it announced that the Kvanefjeld mining project, would not proceed.
The party state that although they are not directly opposed to mining, they are “opposed to dirty mining”. They aim to implement (实施) strict standards for mining companies to reduce environmental influence to the lowest possible level.
However, the new government plans to go on with caution as foreign interest in Greenland’s resources continues to grow.
1. Why is the Inuit Ataqatigit against the project?| A．It has a foreign company behind. | B．It has the support of another party. |
| C．It could damage the local environment. | D．It could become the most significant mine. |
| A．Inaccessible. | B．Inexpensive. | C．Impure. | D．Unused. |
| A．The project is dependent on Denmark’s economy. |
| B．The project can bring economic benefits to Greenland. |
| C．The project is a must for the development of Greenland. |
| D．The project can solve problems related to climate change. |
| A．Close all the mines on the island. | B．Stay in power as long as possible. |
| C．Strictly limit the activities of dirty mining. | D．Reduce the foreign interest in their resources. |
增加：在缺词处加一个漏词符号（∧），并在其下面写上该加的词。
删除：把多余的词用斜线（﹨）划掉。
修改：在错的词下划一横线，并在该词下面写上修改后的词。
注意：1. 每处错误及其修改均仅限一词；
2. 只允许修改10处，多者（从第11处起）不计分。
As is known to us, a large number of wild animals has been killed for their meat. As a result, thousand of animals have either died out and become endangered.
Actually, protect wild animals benefits the animals as well as humans. For an example, if farmers killed too many eagles, their corn and grain would be destroyed by rats. The reason is because with no eagles to hunt rats, their number would increase rapid.
Therefore, all of us must do what they can to protect wild animals. As for me, I have joined an organization in our town which aim is to call on people to protect wild animals and I have taken part several activities.
1.活动开始时间
2.活动开展情况
3.活动后社区变化
注意：
1.写作词数应为80词；
2.可以适当增加细节，以使行文连贯。
Dear Jack,
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Yours,
Li Hua
4 . The situation of the world’s plants is not good. One fifth of the kinds of plants are in danger of disappearing, according to a report.
“Plants are very vital to human beings,” said Kathy Willis, who led the new report. “Plants provide us with everything—food, fuel, and medicine, and they are very important for our climate controlling. Without plants we would not be here.”
The good news is that deforestation rates around the world have dropped largely since the 1950s. However, this report on the health of plants around the world shows that there is much more to be done.
The report predicts that there are now 390,900 kinds of plants. And about 21 percent of those plants are in danger of disappearing. “The good side is that we’re still discovering lots of new plants, about 2,000 each year,” said Dr. Willis. “The bad side is that we’ve seen a huge change in land cover, mainly caused by cultural activity, with a little bit of climate change in there as well.”
Human activity has a great effect on the danger of plants disappearing. As humans cut down forests to make room for agriculture, towns and cities, biodiversity is lost. This could not only affect our own food supply directly, but also affect the food web.
1. What does the underlined word “vital” in Paragraph 2 probably mean?| A．Useless. | B．Friendly. | C．Equal. | D．Important. |
| A．New plants are more than ever before. | B．About half the plants will disappear soon. |
| C．Many new plants are found every year. | D．Plants mustn’t be used to produce medicine. |
| A．We have made little progress. | B．There is a long way for us to go. |
| C．We have achieved our goal. | D．There will be nothing we can do. |
| A．Biodiversity Being Lost | B．Human Social Activity |
| C．Environment Protection | D．Nature Climate Change |
5 . Ride-sharing services are thought to help to reduce pollution since fewer people use private vehicles and cause carbon dioxide．However, a new study has found that these services result in much more pollution than other kinds of private and public transportation．Ride-sharing trips also draw passengers away from more environmentally-friendly methods of travel, like public transportation, walking or biking, the study found．
Several studies in recent years have suggested that ride-sharing services like Uber and Lyft can worsen traffic problems in cities, which continue to have high rates of private vehicle ownership．
The new study, carried out by the nonprofit group Union of Concerned Scientists, represents an attempt to center on how ride-sharing services affect pollution．The research examined the effects of ride-sharing services on seven of America's largest cities．Overall, the researchers reported that ride-sharing trips now “result in about 69 percent more climate pollution on average than the trips they replace”．The study notes that the same passengers could have chosen to travel by bus, train, bike, scooter(小型摩托车)or on foot．
One of the big reasons they give for this result is that ride-sharing vehicles are often driven with no passengers in the car．This happens when drivers are either waiting for rider requests, are on the way to pick up passengers or are driving between pickups．
This situation, known as“deadheading” takes up about 42 percent of the ride-sharing driving activity, the study found．The researchers said that “deadheading” results in about 50 percent more carbon dioxide than one person driving in a private vehicle．
The study urges services like Uber and Lyft to increase the number of electric vehicles on the road and to improve connections to public transportation centers．The two companies already operate businesses that offer electric scooters and bikes and have begun to include public transportation information in their systems．In some cities, they have also promoted vehicle electrification．
1. According to the text, it is generally thought that car-sharing services _____________．| A．lower the price of private cars | B．guarantee a healthier lifestyle |
| C．greatly cut down travel expenses | D．are environmentally-friendly |
| A．The so-called “deadheading”． | B．The old way vehicles travel． |
| C．The huge number of passengers． | D．The unfamiliar ride-sharing trips． |
| A．It is opposed by ride-sharing services． | B．It is actually of practical significance． |
| C．It requires improving in the long term． | D．It earns much money for Uber and Lyft． |
| A．Travel． | B．Technology． | C．Economy． | D．Environment． |
6 . In August 2017,Southeast Texas was badly affected by Hurricane Harvey.About 30 miles west of Houston,the town of Katy,Texas,took a hard
Beaver Aplin,owner of the popular Bucee's chain of convenience
Meanwhile,the locals ran,drove and paddled(划船）to
Other residents found
These are just a small part of the
Even first responders coming from outside Katy could instantly feel the town's
| A．hit | B．choice | C．decision | D．time |
| A．damaged | B．abandoned | C．closed | D．broken |
| A．begin | B．fall | C．stop | D．come |
| A．windows | B．minds | C．wallets | D．hearts |
| A．restaurants | B．pubs | C．hotels | D．stores |
| A．flood | B．storm | C．virus | D．event |
| A．early | B．greatly | C．luckily | D．suddenly |
| A．ask | B．take | C．demand | D．leave |
| A．meet | B．attend | C．visit | D．rescue |
| A．boat | B．bus | C．air | D．bike |
| A．produced | B．sent | C．consumed | D．released |
| A．bill | B．prize | C．order | D．tool |
| A．effective | B．perfect | C．available | D．creative |
| A．wiped out | B．carried away | C．cleaned up | D．looked for |
| A．stories | B．scenes | C．signs | D．conditions |
| A．insists | B．denies | C．accepts | D．proves |
| A．noble | B．selfless | C．pure | D．mean |
| A．amazing | B．interesting | C．confusing | D．exciting |
| A．guiding | B．finding | C．helping | D．giving |
| A．proud | B．afraid | C．shocked | D．impressed |
7 . We are what we eat,and what we eat shows something about what we are in return.So it shouldn't be all that surprising that humans are now apparently eating plastic.
A small trial at the Medical University of Vienna found tiny pieces of it in the digestive(消化的）systems of people from eight different countries,including the UK.The study involved just eight people and doesn't tell us what,if any,effect eating plastic was having on their bodies,which means more research is needed before we know what any of this really means.We already knew that fish were eating plastic.Did we really think it wouldn't reach back up to the top of the food chain,and that the consequences of our own actions couldn't return to affect us?
Does it actually matter?This study can't yet answer that question,because all it tells us is that microplastics(微塑料）were found in human faeces(粪便）。If they're just passing through like unwelcome guests before being driven out of the body,then perhaps there's no damage done.If there were evidence of plastics being absorbed in our internal organs,that could be a dangerous sign.And solving plastic pollution must not be delayed.
Solving plastic pollution is not as simple as some campaigners make it sound.Changing from plastic packaging to other materials would cause other environmental problems,for a start.Bottling liquids in glass rather than plastic makes them heavier,which potentially means more trips to transport them.There is a reason,in short,why we relied so much on plastic in the first place,and even if it were possible to stop using the stuff tomorrow,it would take up to 1,000 years for some of what's being produced right now to disappear completely.
But just because it's difficult,it doesn't mean we can do nothing.There is something really mad about a society that on the one hand is obsessed with the quality of the food we put in our mouths,but on the other hand happily eats its own garbage.The war on plastic,it seems,just got personal.
1. What do we know about the study mentioned in the text?| A．It involved eight people from different regions of the UK. |
| B．It revealed that fish eating plastic has bad effects on their bodies. |
| C．It found small plastic pieces in most parts of peoples internal tissues. |
| D．It didn't give clear conclusions about the effects of eating plastic. |
| A．Other materials are heavier than plastic. |
| B．People depend heavily on plastic in their daily life. |
| C．The plastic being produced needs 1,000 years to break down. |
| D．Other materials are more difficult to transport. |
| A．Nothing can be done to solve the plastic problem. |
| B．We should eat more safe and healthy food. |
| C．Our society's future is hopeless as it is so crazy. |
| D．It is going to be difficult to settle the plastic problem. |
| A．it's time we solved environmental pollution |
| B．plastic pollution is too serious to deal with |
| C．even our own bodies contain plastic waste |
| D．the earth is highly polluted by plastic |
8 . 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. |
9 . A survey in the Philippines has shown the country uses a “shocking” amount of single-use plastic, including nearly 60 billion sachets (小袋) a year, a new report said Friday. The report, produced by the non-governmental organization GAIA, is part of an effort to collect data on plastic consumption as environmentalists push for government action to reduce plastic waste.
It contains shocking figures: every day, almost 48 million shopping bags are used throughout the Philippines, adding up to more than 17 billion a year. And that figure does not include the smaller, thinner and often transparent plastic bags known as “labo” bags—around 16.5 billion of those are used per year across the country, the report says. The figures are based on 21 waste assessments conducted in 13 cities across the Philippines, with the national figures produced by extrapolating(推断) from local results.
More than half of non-recyclable plastic analyzed in the survey came from sachets—small plastic packets often lined with aluminium or containing other materials that make them non-recyclable. Small portions of products ranging from coffee to shampoo are often sold in sachets in the Philippines, and are seen as an affordable solution for consumers.
But Grate said the popularity appeared to be more a result of what is available, with wealthier consumers simply buying multiple sachets. “If you go to the supermarkets, it’ s rare for you to be able to buy coffee in bigger containers; it’s all in sachets,” he said.
The survey is the first time an organization has tried to quantify(确定数量) sachet use, and the NGO hopes to pressure both the government and industry to take action on controlling single-use plastic. The report found that where local-level plastic bag bans have been put in place and strictly enforced, usage has dropped dramatically.
It urged the government to “institute a comprehensive national plastic bag ban that promotes reusable bags”. And it wants regulations on other single-use plastic products and rules requiring companies to redesign products and packaging to minimize plastic waste.
1. What’ s the purpose of GAIA in carrying out the survey?| A．To show how shocking the amount of plastic waste can be. |
| B．To get people and the government know better about its final goal. |
| C．To collect accurate numbers of plastic bags used in the whole country. |
| D．To help make the government take measures to reduce plastic waste. |
| A．They are not made of only plastic. |
| B．They won’ t last long after being buried. |
| C．They cost less to be made than recycled. |
| D．They can naturally change to a simpler chemical form. |
| A．They can’ t be easily afforded. | B．Big containers are rarely available. |
| C．Shopping bags are often transparent. | D．They are more environmentally friendly. |
| A．By producing fewer products. |
| B．By inventing new recycling machines. |
| C．By donating money to recycling companies. |
| D．By using as little plastic as possible on their products. |
10 . Would you know what to do if a fire started in your home? Take the time now to review the following safety tips, and your family will be prepared in time of a fire in your home:
An escape plan can help every member of a family get out of a burning house. The idea is to get outside quickly and safely.
Stay low
If you can see smoke in the house, stay low to the ground as you make your way to the exit.
What if you can’t get out right away?
If you can’t get out fast because fire or smoke is stopping an escape route, you will want to yell for help. You can do this from an open window or call 911 if you have a phone with you.
If your clothes catch fire, what should you do?
Your clothes could catch fire during a fire or by accident if you step too close to a candle. If this happens, don’t run! Instead, stop, drop to the ground, cover your face with your hands, and roll. This will cut off the air and put out the flames.
| A．An easy way to remember this is: Stop, Drop, and Roll! |
| B．Smoke from a fire can make it hard to see where things are. |
| C．Preventing fires is in the first place! |
| D．Know your way out |
| E．They will help prepare you for what you need to do in case of a fire. |
| F．Even if you are scared, never hide under the bed or in a closet. |
| G．In a fire, smoke and poisonous (有毒的) air hurt more people, than the actual flames (火焰) do. |
