There
2 . 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 |
3 . Several years ago, Jason Box, a scientist from Ohio, flew 31 giant rolls of white plastic to a glacier (冰川) in Greenland. He and his team spread them across 10,000 feet of ice, then left. His idea was that the white blanket would reflect back the rays of the sun, keeping the ice cool below. When he came back to check the results, he found it worked. Exposed ice had melted faster than covered ice. He had not only saved two feet of glacier in a short time. No coal plants were shut down, no jobs were lost, and nobody was taxed or fired. Just the sort of fix we’re looking for.
“Thank you, but no thank you.” says Ralph King, a climate scientist. He told Grey Childs. author and commentator, that people think technology can save the planet, “but there are other things we need to deal with, like consumption. They burned $50,000 just for the helicopter” to bring the plastic to the glacier. This experiment, quote-unquote, gives people false hope that climate change can be fixed without changing human behavior. It can’t. Technology won’t give us a free ride.
Individuals respond to climate change differently. Climatologist Kelly Smith is hardly alone in her prediction that someday soon we won’t be climate victims, we will be climate Choosers. More scientists agree with her that if the human race survives. The engineers will get smarter, the tools will get better, and one day we will control the climate. but that then? “Just the mention of us controlling the climate sent a small shiver down my back, Grey writes.” “Something sounded wrong about stopping ice by our own will,” he says.
Me? I like it better when the earth takes care of itself, I guess one day we will have to run the place, but for the moment, sitting at my desk, looking out at the trees bending wildly and the wind howling, I’m happy not to be in charge.
1. Why does the author mention Jason Box’s experiment in the first paragraph?| A．To introduce a possible solution to climate change. |
| B．To describe a misleading attempt to fix the climate. |
| C．To report on a successful experiment on saving the glacier. |
| D．To arouse people’s attention to the problem of global warming. |
| A．The fight against climate change will not succeed. |
| B．Technology is not the final solution, let alone its high cost. |
| C．It’s best to deal with climate change without changing our behavior. |
| D．Jason’s experiment plays a significant role in fixing climate change. |
| A．Favorable | B．Tolerant | C．Doubtful. | D．Unclear. |
| A．But should we fix the climate? |
| B．Is climate change a real problem? |
| C．How can we take care of the earth? |
| D．What if all the glaciers disappeared? |
4 . By the end of the century, if not sooner, the world’s oceans will be bluer and greener thanks to a warming climate, according to a new study.
At the heart of the phenomenon lie tiny marine microorganisms(海洋微生物) called phytoplankton. Because of the way light reflects off the organisms, these phytoplankton create colourful patterns at the ocean surface. Ocean colour varies from green to blue, depending on the type and concentration of phytoplankton. Climate change will fuel the growth of phytoplankton in some areas, while reducing it in other spots, leading to changes in the ocean’s appearance.
Phytoplankton live at the ocean surface, where they pull carbon dioxide(二氧化碳) into the ocean while giving off oxygen. When these organisms die, they bury carbon in the deep ocean, an important process that helps to regulate the global climate. But phytoplankton are vulnerable to the ocean’s warming trend. Warming changes key characteristics of the ocean and can affect phytoplankton growth, since they need not only sunlight and carbon dioxide to grow, but also nutrients.
Stephanie Dutkiewicz, a scientist in MIT’s Center for Global Change Science, built a climate model that projects changes to the oceans throughout the century. In a world that warms up by 3℃, it found that multiple changes to the colour of the oceans would occur. The model projects that currently blue areas with little phytoplankton could become even bluer. But in some waters, such as those of the Arctic, a warming will make conditions riper for phytoplankton, and these areas will turn greener. “Not only are the quantities of phytoplankton in the ocean changing. ” she said, “but the type of phytoplankton is changing.”
And why does that matter? Phytoplankton are the base of the food web. If certain kinds begin to disappear from the ocean, Dutkiewicz said, “it will change the type of fish that will be able to survive.” Those kinds of changes could affect the food chain.
Whatever colour changes the ocean experiences in the coming decades will probably be too gradual and unnoticeable, but they could mean significant changes. “It’ll be a while before we can statistically show that the changes are happening because of climate change,” Dutkiewicz said, “but the change in the colour of the ocean will be one of the early warning signals that we really have changed our planet.”
1. What are the first two paragraphs mainly about?| A．The various patterns at the ocean surface. |
| B．The cause of the changes in ocean colour. |
| C．The way light reflects off marine organisms. |
| D．The efforts to fuel the growth of phytoplankton. |
| A．Sensitive. | B．Beneficial. | C．Significant. | D．Unnoticeable. |
| A．Phytoplankton play a declining role in the marine ecosystem. |
| B．Dutkiewicz’s model aims to project phytoplankton changes. |
| C．Phytoplankton have been used to control global climate. |
| D．Oceans with more phytoplankton may appear greener. |
| A．To assess the consequences of ocean colour changes. |
| B．To analyse the composition of the ocean food chain. |
| C．To explain the effects of climate change on oceans. |
| D．To introduce a new method to study phytoplankton. |
5 . Science reporting on climate change does lead Americans to adopt more accurate beliefs and support government action on the issue, but these gains are fragile, a new study suggests. Researchers found that these accurate beliefs fade quickly when people are exposed to coverage skeptical of climate change.
“It is not the case that the American public does not respond to scientifically informed reporting when they are exposed to it,” said Thomas Wood, associate professor of political science at the Ohio State University. “But even truly accurate science reporting recedes from people’s frame of reference very quickly.”
Results showed that accurate science reporting didn’t persuade only politicians and people who initially rejected human-caused climate change also had their opinions shifted by reading accurate articles. The study involved 2,898 online participants who participated in four waves of the experiment during the fall of 2020.
In the first wave, they all read authentic articles in the popular media that provided information reflecting the seientifie views on climate change. In the second and third waves, they read either another scientific article, an opinion article that was skeptical of climate science, or an article on an unrelated subjeet. In the fourth wave, the participants simply were asked their beliefs about the science of climate change and their policy attitudes.
To rate participants’ scientific understanding. the researchers asked after each wave if they believed that climate change is happening and has a human cause. To measure their attitudes, researchers asked participants if they favored government action on climate change and if they favored renewable energy.
“What we found suggests that people need to hear the same accurate messages about climate change again and again. If they only hear it once, it recedes very quickly,” Wood said. It was significant that accurate reporting had positive effects on all groups, including those who originally rejected climate change. But it was even more encouraging that it affected attitudes.
1. What does the underlined word “recedes” in paragraph 2 mean?| A．Increases. | B．Graduates. | C．Disappears. | D．Strikes. |
| A．The research object. | B．The research result. |
| C．The research purpose. | D．The research procedure. |
| A．To survey the government’s satisfaction rate. |
| B．To make an assessment on their attitudes. |
| C．To teach them scientific understanding. |
| D．To measure action on climate change. |
| A．Science Report Of Climate Change Can Affect Minds |
| B．Online Participants Joined In A Four-Wave Experiment |
| C．Accurate Science Reporting Don’t Persuade Only Politicians |
| D．People Should Hear Accurate Messages About Climate Change |
| A．The weather. | B．The scenery. | C．The traffic. |
7 . The streets, sidewalks and roofs of cities all absorb heat during the day, making some urban areas across the United States up to 6 degrees Fahrenheit hotter than rural ones during the day—and 22 degrees F hotter at night. These “urban heat islands” can also develop underground as the city heat spreads downward, beneath the surface. And basements, subway tunnels and other underground infrastructure also constantly bleed heat into the surrounding earth, creating hotspots. Now the underground heat is building up as the planet warms.
According to a new study of downtown Chicago, underground hotspots may threaten the very same structures that emit the heat in the first place. Such temperature changes make the ground around them expand and contract (收缩) enough to cause potential damage. “Without anyone realizing it, the city of Chicago’s downtown was deforming,” says the study’s author Alessandro F. Rotta Loria, a civil and environmental engineer at Northwestern University.
The findings, published in Communications Engineering, expose a “silent hazard (危险)” to civil infrastructure in cities with soft er ground — especially those near water — Rotta Loria says. “There might have been structural issues caused by this underground climate change that happened, and we didn’t even realize,” he adds. While not an immediate or direct danger to human lives, this previously unknown effect highlights the impacts of a lesser-known component of climate change.
Similar to climate change above the surface, these underground changes occur over long periods of time. “These effects took decades, a century, to develop,” Rotta Loria says, adding that elevated underground temperatures would likewise take a long time to dissipate (逐渐消失) on their own.
But other researchers interviewed for this story all say this wasted energy could also be recycled, presenting an opportunity to both cool the subsurface and save on energy costs. Subway tunnels and basements could be updated with technologies to recapture the heat. For example, water pipes could be installed to run through underground hotspots and pick up some of the heat energy.
1. What can we learn about the “urban heat islands”?| A．They can develop underground structures. |
| B．They are impacted by global warming. |
| C．They can destroy the ground around. |
| D．They only exist in the United States. |
| A．To discuss structural issues. |
| B．To categorize climate change. |
| C．To explain underground heat. |
| D．To emphasize the neglected reality. |
| A．The future of tunnels and basements. |
| B．The reusing approaches of heat energy. |
| C．The cost of maintaining structures. |
| D．The evolution of underground environment. |
| A．Warming Underground, Weakening Surface |
| B．A Silver Lining of Global Warming |
| C．Urban Silent Islands in the Making |
| D．A Silent Crisis in Downtown Chicago |
8 . In the midst of an already record-breaking heat wave, Phoenix, Arizona, set a particularly eye-popping record: the temperature only dropped to 97 degrees Fahrenheit overnight between Tuesday and Wednesday, setting an all-time record high for a nighttime low. When temperatures stay high overnight, they place a particularly heavy burden on the body, raising the risk of heat illness and death.
The U.S. —and the world—has seen a spate of extreme heat so far this year, including the planet’s hottest-ever June and hottest week on record during the first week of July. Rising global temperatures from burning fossil fuels are the main driver of more frequent and more intense heat waves. And an El Niño event is also boosting global temperatures this year.
A heat dome has been in place for weeks over the U.S. Southwest and Texas, and it has fueled many heat records. Phoenix has now seen 20 days in a row with a daytime high of 110 degrees F or higher, a record that is likely to continue for several more days. A heat dome is an area of high pressure that parks over a region. High-pressure ridges, as they are also called, feature sinking air, which compresses and heats up. These ridges’ typical clear skies also allow the sun’s rays to beat down on the ground, further raising temperatures.
Prolonged heat extremes pose a major public health threat because heat is the number-one weather-related killer in the U.S.; it causes more human deaths than hurricanes, tornadoes and floods combined. Heat can cause dehydration, which leads the blood to thicken and makes the heart pump harder. That organ and others can be damaged by too much exposure to heat.
The soaring, triple-digit high daily temperatures grab the headlines, and they definitely are a concern—but when temperatures only drop into the 80s and 90s at night, the body doesn’t get a chance to cool down. This is particularly a concern for those who lack air-conditioning, including unhoused populations. And heat is especially a health risk for the very young, the elderly and those with preexisting health conditions such as asthma and heart disease.
1. What can be inferred from the first two paragraphs?| A．Extreme temperatures can cause damage to our hearts. |
| B．Burning fossil fuels contributes to the hottest-ever June and July. |
| C．El Nino is the dominant cause of soaring global temperature. |
| D．The temperature at night has reached a record high in Phoenix, Arizona. |
| A．It’s a weather phenomenon that contributes to high temperatures. |
| B．It’s a peak that the low pressure should reach. |
| C．It’s the damage caused by too much exposure to heat. |
| D．It’s the extra heat trapped in the sinking air. |
| A．It is the top one killer in America. | B．Exposure to heat contributes to heart diseases. |
| C．Human organs might be impaired. | D．People accommodate to 80s and 90s Fahrenheit at night. |
| A．Soaring temperatures are hitting the headlines. | B．Anew eye popping overnight low record is set. |
| C．Hot overnight temperatures threaten human health. | D．Global heat waves are causing concerns. |
9 . “A lot of the time when climate change is discussed in mainstream media, people are asking ‘can humans overcome this?’, or ‘what technology can solve this?’. It’s high time we recognized that animals also have to adapt to various changes. We know some animals change their skin colors to escape from natural enemies or due to environment pollution,” says Ryding. “The climate change that we have created is putting a lot of pressure on them, and some species try to adapt by shapeshifting (变形). ”
Strong shapeshifting has particularly been reported in birds. Several species of Australian parrot have shown, on average, a 4%—10% increase in beak (鸟喙) size since 1871, and this is positively linked with the summer temperature each year. North American dark-eyed juncos, a type of small songbird, had a link between increased beak size and short-term temperature extremes in cold environments. There have also been reported changes in mammalian species. Researchers have reported tail length increases in wood mice and leg size increases in masked shrews (鼩鼱).
“The increases in some body parts size we see so far are quite small—less than 10%—so the changes are unlikely to be immediately noticeable,” says Ryding. “However, some body parts such as ears are predicted to increase.”
Ryding intends to investigate shapeshifting in Australian birds firsthand by 3D scanning museum bird specimens from the past 100 years. It will give her team a better understanding of which birds are changing their body parts and why. “Shapeshifting does not mean that animals are coping with climate change and that all is ‘fine’,” says Ryding. “It just means they are adapting to survive it—but we’re not sure what the other ecological consequences of these changes are, or indeed that all species are capable of changing and surviving. ”
1. What may cause animals’ shapeshifting according to Ryding?| A．Human hunting. | B．Climate change. |
| C．Natural enemies. | D．Polluted surroundings. |
| A．Giving examples. | B．Cause-effect analysis. |
| C．Making comparison. | D．Process analysis. |
| A．Animals can well adapt to changes and survive. |
| B．Influence of animals’ shapeshifting is uncertain. |
| C．Rdying will research into bird museums in Australia. |
| D．All adaptations of animals to climate change are beneficial. |
| A．Technology. | B．Health care. | C．Environment. | D．Education. |
10 . Saving Us: A Climate Scientist’s Case for Hope and Healing in a Divided World is one of the most important books about climate change to have been written. Hayhoe is a gifted public speaker and Saving Us is a follow-up to her awesome TED talk in 2018, “The most important thing you can do to fight climate change: talk about it.”
One of the many refreshing aspects of this book is that Hayhoe recounts both her successes and her failures to communicate, through which she has gathered evidence about what works and what does not. Much of the book’s advice is common sense, all backed up not just by Hayhoe’s experience but also with convincing research by psychologists and social scientists.
Hayhoe advises against trying to engage with a small minority, the “Dismissives”, who “angrily reject the idea that human-caused climate change is a threat; they are most receptive to misinformation and conspiracy theories (阴谋论)”. There is a warning that offering up more facts about climate change can actually increase polarisation (两极化) among them.
The book includes amusing examples of her encounters with the “Dismissives”, almost entirely older men—including an engineer who was unconvinced about the evidence but with whom she was able to establish mutual (相互的) respect through a shared passion for knitting (打毛线衣) —and is packed with inspiring accounts of how she has won over even the most suspicious of crowds. Her motto is “bond, connect and inspire”, which represents her approach of always looking for points of commonality.
She also tells of a man who approached her after an event in London in 2019. He had been so inspired by her TED talk that he had started to speak to everybody he could in his neighborhood of Wandsworth. He showed her details of 12, 000 conversations that had taken place as a result, claiming that they had helped to convince the government to declare a climate emergency and to switch investments from fossil fuels to renewable energy.
And so, while it may feel difficult to influence the outcome of the COP26, Hayhoe’s uplifting book makes a persuasive case that we can all do our bit to bring about success just by talking about the issue.
1. What does the book mainly focus on?| A．Promoting people’s insight into climate change. |
| B．Introducing presentation skills with TED talks. |
| C．Developing critical thinking through literature. |
| D．Sharing communication tips on climate change. |
| A．Humorous but one-sided. | B．Novel and interesting. |
| C．Well-based and workable. | D．Serious and hard to follow. |
| A．By changing their political identity. |
| B．By challenging their fundamental beliefs. |
| C．By seeking common ground built on a shared interest. |
| D．By providing more facts about climate change. |
| A．The shift to clean energy is unstoppable. |
| B．Conversations can influence climate decision-making. |
| C．Policymakers turn a blind eye to market changes. |
| D．We should call on people to prepare for the climate crisis. |
