1 . It’s a known fact that emissions (排放物) from gas-powered vehicles are harming the atmosphere. In response to this, Porsche, the German sports car company, began producing e-fuels at a pilot plant in Chile last year. Currently, the fuel will be used only in sports cars at Porsche’s performance and experience centers.
E-fuels are made by passing electricity through water. The electricity separates the hydrogen and oxygen from water. The hydrogen is then mixed with CO₂ to produce a liquid e-fuel, which can be produced using many renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power. E-fuels follow the chemical structure of gasoline, making it possible for gas-powered cars to run on e-fuels almost without any change.
E-fuels can help ease the transform away from gas-powered cars, for those who may not be able to afford electric vehicles (EV). It will also help to reduce waste by keeping gas-powered cars in service, instead of throwing them away prematurely. Additionally, the use of e-fuels will not require new facility to be built unlike EVs. Existing gas stations and cars will be able to stay in use, which is already a big saving.
Despite the many benefits, opinions differ on whether e-fuels are truly eco-friendly. E-fuels are widely said to be nearly carbon neutral (碳中和), although an independent study indicates that e-fuels release the same amount of CO₂ as gasoline. Since e-fuels are still being developed and tested, their true impacts are still unknown. Meanwhile, e-fuels are very expensive to produce, partly due to energy loss during production. Unfortunately, only about half of the energy used in producing e-fuels is actually transformed into fuel. Additionally, only about 16% of the energy used in e-fuel production is actually used to power the car. Whereas, about 70% of energy is preserved when powering an EV. Even though the use of e-fuels will preserve existing facility, it will still take time and money to integrate it into everyday life. Currently, the price of e-fuels is nearly double the cost of regular fuel.
E-fuels are still a work in progress. Though opinions are divided on e-fuels, with more testing and development, they have been considered another way to help fight against the climate crisis. “There are currently more than 1.3 billion vehicles with combustion (内燃) engines worldwide. Many of these will be on the roads for decades to come, and e-fuels offer the owners of existing cars a nearly carbon-neutral alternative. With the e-fuels pilot plant, Porsche is playing a leading role in this development,” said Michael Steiner, member of the Executive Board for Development and Research at Porsche AG.
1. What can we learn from this passage?| A．E-fuels release no CO₂. |
| B．E-fuels were tested in Germany at first. |
| C．E-fuels are applicable to gas-powered cars. |
| D．E-fuels need to be mixed with CO₂ in actual use. |
| A．draw a conclusion. | B．present an opinion |
| C．further a discussion | D．provide a solution |
| A．Positive. | B．Dismissive. | C．Doubtful. | D．Objective. |
Some bullet trains don’t run on tracks at all. They fly over them. They
3 . When it comes to lowering our carbon emissions (排放), it seems that nothing is simple. Electric vehicles (EVs) act as an example of potential greenwash. “They seem very attractive at first sight,” writes The Next Web in a report. “When we look more closely, it becomes clear that they have a substantial carbon footprint.”
The rare earth metals and costly minerals included as essential ingredients in EV batteries are not renewable. What’s more, their extraction (提炼) is often anything but green.
So the question is: is it worth it? Just how much emission reduction can EVs justify? Luckily, a life cycle assessment has been done to give us some answers.
“A life cycle analysis of emissions considers three phases,” writes The Next Web. “the manufacturing phase, the use phase, and the recycling phase.” In the manufacturing phase, the battery is to blame. “Emissions from manufacturing EV batteries were estimated to be 3.2 tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), 1/4 of those from an electric car, 13 tons of CO2. Those were bigger than emissions from gas cars, 10.5 tons of CO2.” If the vehicle life is assumed to be 150,000 kilometers, emissions from the manufacturing phase of an electric car are higher than gas cars.”
In the use phase, the source of electricity the consumer is using to power their car comes into play in a major way. “To understand how the emissions of electric car vary with a country’s renewable electricity share, consider Australia and New Zealand,” continues the report. “In 2018, Australia’s share of renewables in electricity was about 21%. In contrast, the number in New Zealand’s was about 84%. Electric car emissions in Australia and New Zealand are estimated at about 170g and 25g of CO2 per km respectively. As a consumer, our car is only as green as our country’s energy mix.”
Finally, in the recycling phase, we look at vehicle dismantling(拆除), vehicle recycling, battery recycling, and material recovery. “The estimated emissions in this phase, based on a study, are about 1.8 tons for a gas car and 2.4 tons for an electric car. This difference is mostly due to the emissions from battery recycling, which is 0.7 tons,” shows in the report. “While electric cars cause more greenhouse gas emissions than gas cars do, it's important to note the recycled batteries can be used in subsequent batteries. This could have significant emissions reduction benefits in the future. For complete life cycle emissions, the study shows that EV emissions are 18% lower than gas cars.”
So here’s the takeaway: EVs are greener. Maybe they’re not as green as we thought. There’s certainly room for improvement. But the real challenge lies in speeding the global energy transition toward greener energy-production.
1. Why is a life cycle analysis of emissions made?| A．To illustrate the advantages of EVs. |
| B．To show how gas cars outperform EVs. |
| C．To weigh the environmental impact of EVs. |
| D．To examine the energy sources of gas cars and EVs. |
| A．By giving instructions. | B．By highlighting features. |
| C．By making comparisons. | D．By analyzing cause and effect. |
| A．Recycling of batteries. | B．Overall driving distance. |
| C．Manufacturing technology. | D．Government’s energy policy. |
| A．EVs are worthy of the praise they have received. |
| B．EVs are not successful for their environmental downsides. |
| C．EVs will no longer be widely accepted for their emissions. |
| D．EVs are not truly green until their energy sources become green. |
4 . Each year there is an increasing number of cars on roads and streets as millions of new cars and trucks are produced. One out of every six Americans works at putting together the parts of cars, driving trucks, building roads or filling cars and trucks with gas. Americans won’t live without cars!
Most Americans would find it hard to think what life would look like without cars. However, some have realized the serious problems of the air pollution that is caused by the car.
The polluted air becomes poisonous and dangerous to health.
One way to get rid of the polluted air is to build a car that does not pollute. That’s what several of the large car factories have been trying to do. But to build a clean car is easier said than done. Progress in this field has been slow.
Another way is to take the place of the car engine by something else. Inventors are now working on steam cars as well as electric cars. Many makers believe that it will take years to develop a practical model that pleases man.
To prevent the world from being polluted by cars, we’ll have to make some changes in the way many of us live. Americans, for example, have to cut down on the number of their total cars. They are encouraged to travel and go to work by bicycle. Bicycling is thought to help keep the air clean.
But this change does not come easily. A large number of workers may find themselves without jobs if a car factory closes down. Thus the problem of air pollution would become less important than that of unemployment.
Although cars have led us to a better life, they have also brought us new problems.
1. How many ways to get rid of air pollution are suggested in this article by the writer?| A．Four. | B．Three. |
| C．Two. | D．One. |
| A．to have no work to do | B．to keep the air clean |
| C．to get a better life | D．to go to work by bike |
| A．Bicycling is the only way out. |
| B．The number of cars must be cut down. |
| C．Cars bring us nothing but serious problems. |
| D．Cars bring us not only a better life but serious problems. |
| A．Americans have to cut down on the number of their total cars. |
| B．People are encouraged to travel and go to work by bicycle. |
| C．The number of cars on the roads should be limited every day. |
| D．People should build more roads and fill cars and trucks with gas. |
