1 . The Federal Communications Commission of the US recently issued the first-ever fine for space junk, against the Dish Network. The satellite television company failed to properly deal with one of its satellites, leaving it at a lower orbit than it promised when securing its license.
Some space junk was discarded during missions — maybe an astronaut dropped his lucky penny, or released an instrument’s camera cover after it was no longer needed. Other junk, however, is the result of collisions: Even that lucky penny, traveling at 15 times the speed of a bullet, can cause huge damage — ending a satellite’s mission or, worse, breaking that satellite into pieces.
That’s obviously bad news for satellites. The solution isn’t to demand the launch of fewer satellites; these bring real benefits to people on the Earth.
And while traffic management is certainly necessary, pieces of garbage are never going to be able to follow even the most sensible rules of the orbital road. That means two things need to happen: People need to stop littering, and they need to take out some trash.
The professionals, unsurprisingly, have more carefully considered names for these processes — mitigation (减轻) and remediation (补救). Any time a company wants to put a satellite in the sky, it should have a clear plan for the instrument’s end of life. For objects in very high geostationary orbit (地球同步轨道), this usually involves sending the item to the out-of-the-way “graveyard” orbit. For objects lower down, it tends instead to involve moving them lower still, so that they will bum up upon reentering the atmosphere.
Active removal of garbage that has failed to get out of the way is technically tricky, but at least for large objects, remediation is possible.
Encouragingly, some countries are beginning to try. No nation, however, can save space on its own. A global convention (协定) to set a 21st-century code of conduct for space is in order.
1. What does the underlined word “discarded” in paragraph 2 mean?A.Collected up. | B.Thrown away. |
C.Produced. | D.Ignored. |
A.The satellites benefit our life a lot. |
B.We need new satellites to replace old ones. |
C.Countries are using satellites to occupy space. |
D.We must make a deeper exploration into the universe. |
① Sending satellites to the “graveyard” orbit.
② Moving objects lower still.
③ Active removal of debris.
A.①② | B.②③ | C.①③ | D.①②③ |
A.To provide solutions to space junk. |
B.To explain the damage of space junk. |
C.To call upon countries to fine companies making space junk. |
D.To appeal to nations for the protection off space environment. |
2 . Cows produce much methane, the world’s second worst greenhouse gas, as they breakdown the grass. They are a large source of the greenhouse gases that are driving climate change. Now scientists have shown the pollution from cows can be reduced by adding a little seaweed (海藻) to their food.
Recently, the researchers from the University of California studied 21 cows on a farm for about five months. They taught the cows to get their food from inside a special hood, which allowed the scientists to know the amount of the methane the cows were giving off. They added a small amount of seaweed to the cows’ food.
The consequences were surprisingly good. In some cases, the cows produced 82% less methane. The improvement depended on the kind of food the cows were given. Even the worst-polluting cows produced 33%less methane. Over the five months, the scientists didn’t see any signs that the cows’ stomachs were getting used to the seaweed and starting to produce more methane again. What’s more, the cows that were fed seaweed gained just as much weight as the other cows.
But there are still some big problems with the idea of feeding cows seaweed. For one thing, there’s not adequate seaweed to feed all of the cows in the world. So farmers would have to figure out a way to grow lots of seaweed. A bigger problem is that for most of their lives, cows live in the fields, where they eat grass. That means there’s no chance to feed them seaweed every day.
Still, as the study shows, something as simple as feeding cows seaweed can help reduce some of the pollution causing the climate crisis.
1. Why did the researchers carry out the study?A.To discover healthier grass for cows. | B.To improve the cows’ living conditions. |
C.To test the effects of the seaweed. | D.To measure the amount of methane in the world. |
A.The results of the study. | B.The methods of the experiment. |
C.The background of the subject. | D.The process of the research. |
A.Lacking. | B.Enough. | C.Common. | D.Special. |
A.Critical. | B.Doubtful. | C.Positive. | D.Negative. |
3 . For uncounted generations, trillions of coral polyps (珊瑚虫) have lived and died, leaving behind a material called limestone. Throughout History, limestone was used to construct the Great Pyramid of Egypt, as well as many churches and castles.
Indeed, a living coral reef is remarkable, a “city beneath the sea” filled with a rich variety of life. Most coral reefs can be found in warm, shallow oceans. They occupy just a small part of the ocean floor, but host 25 percent of all ocean life. Each reef is full of colorful fish as well as coral that forms wonderful patterns. In addition to their beauty, the reefs are an important food source for fish, and for. humans.
Threats to coral reefs
Reasons for hope
These threats to coral reefs are very serious, but there is reason to hope that they will survive. If we take steps toward coral reef conservation, it is likely that these tiny creatures — which survived natural threats for millions of years — will be able to rebuild. As conservationist Robert Richmond says, “
A.A diversity of life |
B.A city above the sea |
C.Given a chance, they can come back |
D.Yet the greatest limestone structures in the world are built underwater |
E.Various human activities can cause great harm to the world’s coral reefs |
F.As a result, the fish became stunned, which makes them easy to collet. |
G.This kills most living things nearby and causes damage to the reef’s structure |
4 . Whales are celebrated for being the largest and most intelligent creatures in the ocean. Now, biologists have discovered that they also capture (捕获) tons of carbon from the atmosphere, a service with an economic value of US $1 trillion for all the great whales, according to a new study published by the International Monetary Fund. The study points out that protecting whales, normally viewed as a human good, also has a monetary motivation.
“The carbon capture potential of whales is truly incredible,” said the report. “Our conservative estimates put the value of the average great whale at more than US $2 million, and easily over US $1 trillion for the current stock of great whales.” Whales absorb carbon in their bodies during their long lives, some of which stretch to 200 years. When they die, they sink to the bottom of the ocean, taking the carbon with them. According to the study, each great whale traps around 33 tons of carbon dioxide on average. A tree during the same period only contributes to 3 percent of the carbon absorption of the whale.
Whale populations are today a smidgen of what they once were. It is estimated that there are slightly more than 1.3 million whales in the ocean, a quarter of their pre-whaling number of 4 to 5 million. Some species in particular, like the blue whale, are only 3 percent of what they used to be. “We can create financial methods to promote the restoration of the world’s whale populations,” said the report’s authors. “Rewards could help those who pay significant costs as a result of whale protection.”
With the Paris Agreement coming into force next year and the effects of climate change ever more widespread, we must prevent the harm to whales. Researchers analyzed that unless new methods are put forward, it would take over 30 years to double the number of current whales, and several generations to return them to their pre-whaling numbers. “Society and our own survival can’t afford to wait this long,” they said.
1. What does the new study reveal about whales?A.They are money-makers for good. | B.Their intelligence is unquestionable. |
C.They are a natural climate solution. | D.Their survival is threatened by carbon. |
A.To indicate all matter regarding green efforts. | B.To illustrate whales are friendly to the oceans. |
C.To highlight whales’ carbon capture potential. | D.To emphasize the importance of tree planting. |
A.Climate change intensifies. | B.Whale populations stay low. |
C.Our survival is endangered. | D.Whale protection is a priority. |
A.Protect whales to protect the planet | B.How to restore whale populations |
C.Live in harmony with ocean giants | D.Whales can guarantee our survival |
5 . “Eco-mermaid” Merle Liivand wove a remarkable story with her attachment to the ocean. On March 7, she
That
Since 2022, she’s broken records, swimming vast distances — first in California, then in Florida, and this time swimming the
During her
A.planned | B.kept | C.broke | D.prepared |
A.stronger | B.cleaner | C.lighter | D.cooler |
A.water | B.plastic | C.sand | D.metal |
A.situation | B.cleanup | C.disaster | D.experience |
A.different | B.visible | C.similar | D.challenging |
A.attached to | B.referred to | C.applied to | D.devoted to |
A.connecting | B.removing | C.kicking | D.wiping |
A.hides | B.marks | C.finds | D.carries |
A.depth | B.length | C.width | D.height |
A.continued | B.relaxed | C.faced | D.paused |
A.accomplishment | B.betterment | C.management | D.agreement |
A.training | B.adventure | C.travel | D.marathon |
A.gathered | B.shared | C.sorted | D.pushed |
A.miss | B.review | C.break | D.reach |
A.various | B.lasting | C.positive | D.side |
6 . Despite the difficulties, the California coastal ecosystem is improving, largely thanks to the huge appetite sea otters (海獭) have for crabs. In a creative study, scientists revealed the return of otters to their former habitat in a Central California river mouth has slowed the decrease of the area’s river banks by up to 90%. “It would cost tens of millions of dollars for humans to rebuild these stream banks and restore these rivers. The otters are stabilizing them for free, in exchange for an all-you-can-eat crab feast,” said biology professor Brian Silliman, Ph. D. at Duke University.
Like many California river mouths, Elkhorn once was a habitat for otters, which need to eat around 20 to 25 pounds of food every day, with crabs being one of their favorite meals. But after fur traders hunted the local otter population nearly to extinction, the number of crabs exploded over the next century. Crabs dig into salt river soil, and over time can cause a salt river to wear away and collapse. Today, years after the otters returned, rivers and stream banks became more stable.
Angelini, one of the study’s authors, said that tool is an encouraging sign for her team as they face similar threats to Florida’s coastlines from sea level rise, storms, and extra nutrients overflowing into coastal waters. “All these seem unsurmountable,” Angelini said. “However, this study shows that, if we truly understand the ecosystem and know what tools to use, we can see significant benefits to the health and stability of these systems.”
The research team conducted large-scale surveys across 13 tidal (潮汐的) streams, as well as small-scale field experiments at five locations around the river mouth over a six-year period. Otters were not included in some lest sites but allowed to be used in others, using a caging system designed by Angelini.
“And all these years later, we now see these amazing results. It’s an inspiring story about the benefits of conservation and persistent, long-term research,” Angelini said.
1. What does Brian Silliman think of the function of sea otters?A.It’s complex. | B.It’s expensive. |
C.It’s effective. | D.It’s inefficient. |
A.The collapse of salt rivers. |
B.The hunting for their fur. |
C.The decrease of the sea crabs. |
D.The pollution of their habitat. |
A.Hard to understand. | B.Difficult to deal with. |
C.Impossible to avoid. | D.Dangerous to settle. |
A.The process of the research. |
B.The purpose of the research. |
C.The limitation of the research. |
D.The discovery of the research. |
7 . Google recently announced that it has begun using carbon-free electricity from a geothermal (地热能) project to power data centers in the state of Nevada.
Tim Latimer is chief and co-founder of Fervo Energy based in Houston, Texas. His company is working with Google on its geothermal project. Latimer said that getting electricity on the grid from geothermal resources is an event many new energy companies never reach. He added that he believes geothermal energy will become more well-known than in the past.
The International Energy Agency(IEA) has long suggested geothermal could be an answer to climate change. The IEA said in a 2011 document that geothermal could reach 3.5 percent of global electricity production each year by 2050. The Paris-based international group says geothermal energy could prevent almost 800 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions per year.
Fervo Energy is using this first test to launch other projects that will provide more electricity to the grid. The company is currently completing some work in southwest Utah for a 400-megawatt project. Google and Fervo Energy started working together in 2021 to develop geothermal power. The plant near Winnemucca, Nevada, is now operating and is sending about 3.5 megawatts to the grid.
Google announced in 2020 that it would use what it calls “carbon-free” energy every hour of every day, wherever it operates, by 2030. Many energy experts believe huge companies like Google can play a part in increasing the use of clean energy.
Terrell noted the company was also an early supporter of wind and solar projects, helping those markets grow to where they are today. “It’s a very similar situation. Now that we’ve set a goal to be 24/7 carbon-free energy, we have found it will take more than just wind, solar and storage,” Terrell said.
The United States leads the world in using heat from the Earth for electricity production. U. S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said earlier this year that advances in new geothermal systems will help introduce this form of energy to areas where it has been thought to be impossible. This makes it possible to find energy in more places.
1. What is Tim Latimer’s attitude to working with Google?A.Supportive. | B.Disapproving. | C.Concerned. | D.Indifferent. |
A.Fervo Energy has launched many geothermal projects before. |
B.Geothermal energy will take the place of solar energy. |
C.Getting electricity from geothermal resources has been widely used. |
D.Geothermal energy has the potential to tackle environmental problems. |
A.CO2 emission is to blame for climate change. |
B.Carbon-free electricity only exists in our dream. |
C.Google is setting a good example in environmental protection. |
D.Wind and solar projects are more important than geothermal project. |
A.Geothermal: an answer to climate change |
B.Google: a company launching a new project |
C.IEA: an organization contributing to global warming |
D.CO2: the leading factor to global warming |
8 . The biggest risk to UK forests over the next 50 years is a “catastrophic” collapse of their ecosystems, according to a group of experts. The group of 42 researchers were asked to identify the issues that would have the greatest impact on UK forests in the next half-century. The list was topped by “catastrophic forest ecosystem collapse”, the prospect of a number of risks, from droughts and floods to storms and pests. If action is not taken, the ecosystem will no longer function effectively.
This is the first “horizon scanning” exercise — a technique to identify relatively unknown threats, opportunities, and new trends — of UK forests. The aim is to help researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and society in general, better prepare for the future and address threats before they become critical.
Experts define such a collapse as a “sudden, long-lasting and widespread change in ecosystem state that has major negative impacts on biodiversity and key ecosystem services”. Those ecosystem services include clean air and water. Some species could be pushed to extinction. “Forest collapse will have significant short-and long-term influences on the forest, and wider environment, economy and society,” the researchers said.
The UK is one of the least forested countries in Europe, with 13 percent of land being forested, compared with a European average of 46 percent. The government has a UK tree-planting goal of 30,000 hectares by 2025, but is widely expected to miss it.
A spokesman for the Department for Environment said,“ We will continue to work with partners to tackle the challenges and opportunities raised in today’s report to ensure our trees and woodlands remain healthy, so they can support habitats and a range of wider environmental benefits.”
The Times revealed this year that more than 400,000 trees planted in England to make up for road projects had died since 2018. Experts think an increase in dry spring s and hot summers has made tree aftercare harder.
1. What’s the purpose of the researchers’ making the list?A.To apply more serious laws. | B.To search for potential opportunities. |
C.To learn about the overall situation. | D.To get an insight into natural disasters. |
A.Its definition. | B.Its process. | C.Its consequences. | D.Its causes. |
A.Short-sighted. | B.Time-consuming. | C.Intolerable. | D.Impractical. |
A.It depends on climate. | B.It has a long way to go. |
C.It is bound to be a failure. | D.It needs support from all over the world. |
9 . 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.课后认识;
2.小事情,大环保。
注意:1.词数100左右;
2.开头和结尾已给出,不计入总词数。
Dear fellow students,
I am pleased to speak here on behalf of my group.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Thanks for listening!