1 . The green, natural forest absorbs carbon dioxide from the air through photo- synthesis (光合作用). There is another way of dealing with the climate crisis. That is setting up fields of dark-colored solar panels (太阳能电池板), also known as “solar forests”, which replace power stations that use fossil fuels such as coal and gas to make electricity, thus mitigating harmful emissions (排放) of greenhouse gases.
But since they are both relatively dark, they absorb a lot of solar radiation. Some of the energy is used for photosynthesis in natural forests or to produce electricity in “solar forests”, but most returns to the atmosphere, heating it up. Then what would be the more effective land use option in terms of the climate crisis: planting a forest, or building solar panels? This issue has long been debated by decision-makers around the world. Now, we may have an answer, thanks to a new study.
First, the researchers compared the impact of a forest on the climate crisis in a dry area to that of a solar farm in a similar environment. The researchers found that the albedo effect (反射效应) of both of these “forests” was similar, but that the absorption or prevention of carbon emissions was very different. It turns out that it takes 2.5 years for the heat emitted by solar farms to be balanced by the carbon emissions that are avoided, thanks to the energy they produce. In the case of a natural forest of similar size, it would take more than 100 years of photosynthesis to balance its heating effect.
The researchers also studied how the heating-cooling relationship changed in other climates and found that in more humid environments, the heating effect of planting large numbers of trees is smaller. And the break-even point is reached within 15 to 18 years.
“In dry places, building solar forests seems far more effective in addressing the climate crisis. Meanwhile, forests absorb about a third of annual carbon emissions and play a vital role in the global rain cycle, in maintaining biodiversity and in many other environmental and social contexts. Preventing them from being cut down and planting more trees in humid areas are of great significance,” explains one of the researchers in the study.
1. What does the underlined word “mitigating” in Paragraph 1 probably mean?| A．Releasing. | B．Decreasing. | C．Generating. | D．Stabilizing. |
| A．They cause much damage to the land. |
| B．They result in a serious loss of farmland. |
| C．They contribute to the warming of the atmosphere. |
| D．They lose energy during the absorption of solar radiation. |
| A．The natural forest exhibits a stronger albedo effect. |
| B．The solar forest can generate more energy in dry areas. |
| C．The solar forest is superior in balancing the heating effect. |
| D．The natural forest is more effective in solving the climate crisis. |
| A．More trees should be planted in dry regions. |
| B．More methods should be adopted to address the climate crisis. |
| C．Fields of solar panels should be set up everywhere on the earth. |
| D．Building solar panels and planting trees should be effectively combined. |
2 . Profits from cutting down rainforests are surprisingly small. A freshly cleared square kilometer of the Amazon rainforest fetches an average price of only around $ 12. By contrast, the social costs of clearing it are huge. Some 500 tons of carbon dioxide are pumped into the atmosphere. By an estimate, that does $ 25,000 of harm by accelerating climate change.
Yet still the world’s trees are disappearing. The senseless men cutting down trees receive the profits, but all 8 billion people on the planet pay for the costs. Clearly, if the owners of the rainforest were paid not to destroy it, everyone would be better off. If rainforests were in places with clear landownership and a firm rule of law, the world would no doubt already have funded such a deal. Sadly, they are not.
Local officials are often in league with the loggers, and may be loggers themselves. Consider Brazil. It had a leader, who sided with illegal loggers and ranchers (大农场主). He stopped fining forest criminals and told illegal miners on local reserves he would legalise the mining. On his watch the pace of deforestation rose by 60%. Local communities often refuse to follow the law and order since they see more benefit from deforestation than protecting it. And the land ownership is a mess. When it’s unclear who owns a piece of land, it’s unclear whom to pay to protect it, or whom to fine for destroying it.
Leadership matters. But even under better leaders, people living there should see benefits in protecting them. That will require a big, reliable flow of cash which should come from rich-country governments and from private firms buying carbon credits to make up for their emissions (排放).
Such carbon credits could be used to promote a greener local economy, and clean up local land registration. If there’s enough cash, conditionally paid, locals will be encouraged to protect trees and less likely to elect irresponsible leaders. To preserve such a huge carbon sink — never mind the biodiversity it contains — this would be a bargain.
1. What does the author intend to tell in Paragraph 1?| A．Climate change is accelerating. | B．Rainforest clearing is rather profitable. |
| C．Carbon dioxide is harmful to the atmosphere. | D．The costs of deforestation outweigh the profits. |
| A．Clear landownership. | B．The absence of related law. |
| C．Profit-driving logging. | D．People’s willingness to buy trees. |
| A．More landownership funds. | B．Bringing in more private firms. |
| C．Awareness of saving biodiversity. | D．Paying the locals for the preservation efforts. |
| A．Cash for Saving Rainforests | B．Fight Illegal Logging in Brazil |
| C．Dilemmas of Rainforest Protection | D．Rainforest Deforestation and Climate Change |
1. What is the relationship between the speakers?
| A．Neighbors. | B．Teacher and student. | C．Fellow charity members. |
| A．People wasted electricity. |
| B．Many items were thrown away. |
| C．No used market events were held. |
| A．Teaching lessons to families. |
| B．Building parks in his city. |
| C．Cleaning public spaces. |
| A．Donate some money. |
| B．Allow him to use her place. |
| C．Tell others about his event. |
As the world witnesses more and more extreme weather patterns, it is becoming
The term “cli-fi”
Just
The genre is quite welcome among college students because it usually looks at topics that is relevant
5 . Part of the reason American shoppers are so attracted to wholesale shopping is their belief that it not only prevents waste but can save time and money, providing more value for the dollar. However, recent research suggests that the opposite may be true.
Victoria Ligon, an expert on consumer sciences, studied food purchasing habits of consumers and found that people tended to buy too much food and waste more of it than they realized. “The problem is that people are not shopping frequently enough,” Ligon said, “People are very price sensitive at the grocery store, but tend to fail to notice the cost of unused and wasted food at home.”
A common practice is to visit different stores for different items on a grocery list, “But people tend to overbuy at each of the places,” Ligon said. “People are not planning for the next day, but planning for the next week or two.”
“In theory, planning a week or more in advance sounds ideal. But given the reality of many people’s lives, this is challenging to do well,” Ligon said. “All of our food promotions are designed to get people to buy more. We believe it’s cheaper if we buy more now, but we rarely take into account how much we throw out in the end.”
Ligon noted shifts in the grocery industry that appear promising to help customers reduce food waste. Examples include cost-effective delivery services such as Amazon Fresh and Google Express, which allow consumers to purchase food items when they want to consume them, also reducing their need to frequent so many different stores. However, the study resulted in another troubling finding: The majority of people involved in the study had no idea that they were buying too much and wasting so much.
“When you read advice about reducing waste, it usually centers on what people do after the food is purchased,” Ligon said. “But more importantly, shop on a more frequent basis, so that you are only buying what you are going to consume in the short term.”
1. What do people often ignore when buying food in large quantities?| A．How good the food is. | B．How much will be wasted. |
| C．How much the food costs. | D．How often they should shop. |
| A．It is worth trying. | B．It is not practical. |
| C．It takes great effort. | D．It is not good for health. |
| A．Food prices are lowered. | B．Food waste is prevented. |
| C．Food consumption is reduced. | D．Food purchasing can be done at home. |
| A．Shop More, Buy Less | B．Shop Wisely, Eat Wisely |
| C．Consume More, Waste Less | D．The More You Shop, the More You Waste |
6 . To produce the classic clothing, blue jeans, producers rely on indigo dye (靛蓝染料), the only molecule known to provide jeans’ unique, beloved color. While indigo itself naturally comes from a plant, growing demand for blue jeans throughout the 20th century gave rise to synthetic (合成的) indigo, which is now more commonly used.
Indigo is the dye that makes jeans blue, but it doesn’t mix with water. To dye clothes, usually, chemicals are needed to make the color stick to the cloth. But in Denmark, scientists have created a new way to dye clothes using an enzyme (酶), which is a kind of protein that can cause chemical reactions, instead of harmful chemicals. This new method is better for the environment and doesn’t use poisonous stuff.
The chemical process for dyeing blue jeans has persisted for the last century. Workers are exposed to the poisonous chemicals, which also pollute the environment near factories. Waste water from those factories often ends up in waterways, decimating local ecosystems and even dyeing rivers blue.
Ditte Hededam Welner, the study’s lead researcher, says their new enzyme works really well and is strong enough for making lots of jeans without breaking down. This enzyme makes dyeing with indican, which is like indigo, much less harmful to the planet — about 92% better than the old way.
However, the new method doesn’t fix all the environmental problems of making jeans. Making a single pair of jeans uses a lot of water — enough to fill many bathtubs — from growing the cotton to putting the final touches on the jeans.
Even though the new dyeing process is better for the environment, it’s not always easy or cheap to change to it. Welner’s team isn’t sure if jeans companies will find it easy or affordable to switch to this method. It costs a little bit more — just seven cents extra per pair of jeans — to use the enzyme for dyeing. But Welner believes it’s worth it because it’s much better for the environment.
1. Why was synthetic indigo created in the 20th century?| A．It made jeans’ color unique. | B．It was easy to dye cloth with it. |
| C．People liked jeans made from it. | D．People were in greater need of jeans. |
| A．Troubling. | B．Entering. | C．Destroying. | D．Defeating. |
| A．The colour is more beautiful than the synthetic indigo. |
| B．The market can keep stable goods supplies. |
| C．Enzyme facilitates the advance of science. |
| D．The dye is more environmentally friendly. |
| A．Production costs. | B．Environmental benefits. |
| C．Water consumption. | D．Laborer shortage. |
7 . Every order of takeout comes with a side of single-use plastics and each plastic fork. knife, spoon and straw-whether or not you wanted it or used it-ends up in the trash.
New research found that 139 million metric tons of single-use plastic waste was generated in 2021-six million metric tons more single-use plastics compared to 2019. A hunger for takeout meals during the pandemic contributed to the surge.
An estimated 60% of Americans order takeout or delivery at least once a week and online ordering is growing 300% faster than in-house dining; that means millions of single-use plastic utensils (餐具) are going out with every order.
New laws aim to address the problem. Some of the recent bills are thanks to The National Reuse Network, part of the environmental nonprofit Upstream, which launched a national Skip the Stuff campaign to work out policies that require restaurants to include single-use plastic utensils, straws, and napkins only when customers request them.
The bills also require meal delivery and online apps like Uber Eats, GrubHub and Door Dash to add single-use extras to their menus; customers can choose the items and quantities to have them included in the order. Customers that don’t order the single-use plastics won’t receive them. The goal of the bills is to reduce the 40 billion plastic utensils sent to the landfill (垃圾填埋场) every year.
“Most of the time, people are taking food home or to their offices where there are reusable utensils so these utensils wind up in a drawer or get thrown out,” says Alexis Goldsmith, national organizing director for a nationwide project Beyond Plastics. “Some people do need utensils, but for the most part, they’re not needed.”
To date, Skip the Stuff bills have been passed in several cities, including Denver, Washington, D.C. and Chicago, California and Washington state passed statewide bills that make single-use plastic “accessories” available with takeout orders only upon request.
Organizations like Upstream, Beyond plastics and NRDC have created toolkits to help additional communities launch their own Skip the Stuff campaigns.
1. What does the underlined word “surge” in paragraph 2 probably mean?| A．Great desire. | B．Sharp decline. | C．Rapid increase. | D．Obvious panic. |
| A．Choosing green products. | B．Adding single-use napkins. |
| C．Recycling and reusing utensils. | D．Providing utensils only on request. |
| A．To reduce plastic waste. | B．To stop bad eating habits. |
| C．To encourage people to eat out. | D．To better the dining environment. |
| A．Unimportant. | B．Damaging. | C．Much-needed. | D．Well-known. |
1. Where is the man doing a project about the environment?
| A．At a library. | B．At school. | C．At a lab. |
| A．To get information about a project. |
| B．To know about her job. |
| C．To do research on greenhouse effect. |
| A．Solve the woman’s problem. |
| B．Move some books. |
| C．Do some reading. |
A couple of years ago, I had the pleasure of teaching a young couple to dive (潜水) in Thailand on one of my favorite reefs (礁). The weather conditions were perfect, with mild currents and excellent sight of the beautiful ocean and the bright, vivid corals. Even with their masks on, I could see the smiles on my students’ faces.
The div e couldn’t have gone better. However, things changed as we made our way back to the boat. As we swam back along the reef, I noticed the current (水流) changing As it did, huge quantities of trash and plastic began to flood the area . I saw small reef fish swimming amongst the straws, plastic bags and other bits of rubbish. I noticed that some of the fish were pecking away (啄) at the plastic. By the time we got back onboard the boat, there were bits of plastic floating all around us. It looked more like a trash site than the ocean.
When I got home, the first thing I did was to go online and research plastic pollution in the ocean . I was surprised to find out that over the past decade, divers and beach lovers have seen a lot of changes in the oceans. Even very remote locations were suddenly filled with plastic and other chemicals. Plastics were entering our oceans at an alarming rate —up to 12 million tons each year. This huge amount of plastic was wreaking havoc (破坏) not only on the environment, but also on the marine animals that lived in the ocean, such as sea turtles and sea birds. Some of them were sadly mistaking the pieces of plastic for food. Pollution has brought our oceans to the point of disaster, and unless we make a great change, then our oceans and all of its living things, will be at risk.
Since that unforgettable plastic-polluted dive, I have become an ocean supporter and spend my days trying to get the message out there about just how harmful ocean pollution is, not only to marine life, but also to mankind.
注意：1.续写词数应为150左右；
2.请按如下格式在答题卡的相应位置作答。
Paragraph 1
Then the idea came to me: I could appeal to my fellow divers to take action.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Paragraph 2
I decided to take it a step further to try and stop those companies producing single-use plastics.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________10 . Textile (纺织品) waste is a growing problem for our environment. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reported the US throws away more than 11 million tons of clothing every year. That is why some small businesses spotting the problem are beginning to recycle in ways they haven’t before.
Create Good Company is a clothing company that tries to produce sustainable (可持续的) clothing and repurpose older clothing into updated fashionable items. Maggie. Hendricks, the owner of Create Good Company, said, “If you can revamp what you find, why wouldn’t you do that instead of buying new things? It’s a big issue not to create new waste. I would say we are 90%recycled materials.”
According to the EPA, the average consumer (消费者) throws away 81.5 pounds of clothes every year. “Anywhere between 10%-17%of the waste that’s going into landfills (废弃物填埋场) is made up of things like textiles and clothing,” said Danny Katz with the CoPIRG Foundation.” A lot of the clothing that we’re producing doesn’t even get worn, so it’s going right to the landfill or even being burned and contributing to pollution that way. It’s really worrying.”
This is why businesses like Create Good Company exist—to use outdated clothing and turn it into dresses or jackets.
“There’s just so much waste and so many big companies that might not think about it,” Hendricks said. “Just standing with other like-minded people who are interested in sustainability is important.”
Another important element Hendricks has focused on is creating these items and selling them at an affordable price.
“Sustainability sometimes is green washed in companies and they make things more expensive,” Hendricks said. “That’s not how we become a sustainable world. I think making products affordable is important to me. I want to buy things that are better for the environment without throwing my pocketbook in the fire.”
1. What does the underlined word “revamp” in paragraph 2 mean?| A．Share. | B．Decorate. | C．Replace. | D．Improve. |
| A．The use of old clothing. | B．The cost of textile pollution. |
| C．The effect of clothing waste. | D．The future of the textile industry. |
| A．Its sales. | B．Its price. | C．Its producer. | D．Its quality. |
| A．The EPA’s measures to reduce textile waste |
| B．Small businesses working to prevent textile waste |
| C．Textile businesses’ social responsibility and their waste |
| D．Consumers being aware of the seriousness of textile waste |
