1 . Colorado officials will stick to a plan to kill some mountain lions and bears to support the state’s dropping mule deer (长耳鹿) population.
Wednesday’s vote permits organizations to kill up to 25 black bears and 15 mountain lions per year in the central and western parts of the state. The project will run for three years, to be followed by a six-year study of how deer populations respond to fewer predators(捕食者).
The population of Colorado’s mule deer has suffered a puzzling, years-long drop to about 450,000, which state officials said was about 110,000 fewer than there should be. A 2014 state study tied it to seven causes, including predators, whose number has greatly increased in recent years.
Some experts, however, said the state should focus first on the human-led destruction(破坏) of mule deer habitat(栖息地). “The drop of the mule deer population is obviously not a simple problem with simple causes,” Brian Kurzel, director of the National Wildlife Federation, said. “By far, the greatest problem—the one that I think deserves the most attention in any science-based study—is habitat quantity and quality.”
Kurzel pointed out that the U.S Bureau of Land Management recently agreed to create 15,000 new oil and gas wells somewhere in western Cororado, which was often called “the mule-deer factory”. There, the number of mule deer has fallen to about 30,000 from more than 100,000 in the early 1980s. Though state officials have known oil and gas development affects the population of mule deer, they didn’t go against the plan.
Other causes like building highways, population growth and human activities are also curbing the mule deer population, according to the study.
State Parks and Wildlife officials don’t necessarily disagree. They started a $4.5 million program as a way to gather research for later decisions.
1. Why do Colorado officials want to have so many mountain lions and bears killed?| A．To stop them hurting people. |
| B．To leave more habitat for mule deer. |
| C．To stop the mule deer population from dropping. |
| D．To help researchers carry out a three-year-long study. |
| A．Protecting their habitat. | B．Providing enough food for them. |
| C．Reducing the number of their predators. | D．Asking the government to make an effort. |
| A．limiting. | B．ensuring. | C．increasing. | D．protecting. |
| A．Decisions will be made in one year. |
| B．Habitat loss is the main cause of the drop. |
| C．Human activities aren’t responsible for the drop. |
| D．It’s too early to say what exactly caused the drop. |
2 . The Lifecycle of a T-shirt
We all probably have a lot of T-shirts, but do you ever stop and think about the influence of a T-shirt on the planet? You’d probably be surprised to learn what's involved in the lifecycle of just one T-shirt.
There are 5 major stages: material, production, shipping, use and disposal The material stage involves farming, irrigating, fertilizing, harvesting and ginning（轧花）. While cotton is a natural fiber (纤维）and not as harmful to the environment as manmade fibers, it still takes a toll in the material and production stages. Commercial cotton farming uses a large amount of water, and the use of pesticides (杀虫剂）is widespread across the globe, especially in cotton farming. Studies have shown that farmers spend around $4.1 billion on pesticides annually, of which 25% was spent on cotton crops in the US.
Once the cotton is grown and harvested, so begins the production stage: spinning, knitting（编织）, bleaching, dyeing, cutting, sewing, etc.——these processes also use a great deal of water and energy. Commercial dyes and bleaches are harmful pollutants and can eventually pollute groundwater.
After the T-shirt is produced, it enters the transportation stage. This often involves overseas shipping. Take a look in your closet. Chances are that most of your cotton garments (衣服）are made in China or India. Garments can be shipped via plane, ship or truck…，all of which spill CO2 into the atmosphere. Calculations show that CO2 emissions from light trucks alone amount to 1.15 pounds per mile.
Once the T-shirt reaches the retail market, it is purchased. This stage may seem like the least environmentally damaging part. But consider the number of times you’ve washed and dried your favorite T-shirt. Washing machines are certainly becoming more efficient. However, the average American household does 400 loads of laundry per year, using about 40 gallons of water per load. Such excessive water use is combined with the large amount of energy used by dryers.
The final stage of life is disposal. This releases harmful emissions, or involves a landfill where cotton takes years to break down. Current US records show that an estimated 15% of clothes and shoes are recycled, which means that consumers send a shocking 85% of these materials to landfills.
We all need new clothes every once in a while, but let’s all try to keep in mind what goes into the production of clothing... It has a real impact on the planet.
There are a lot of things you can do to help reduce your impact. Reuse and recycle clothes. If they’re too worn out to wear, cut them up and use them as cleaning rags. Donate them to charity or another organization that recycles textiles. When possible, make an effort to buy organic cotton. Turn down the thermostat(恒温器) on your washer, and line dry your clothes when the weather will allow it.
1. The underlined phrase “takes a toll” probably means “ ”| A．wastes water | B．takes a lot of time |
| C．uses energy | D．has a bad effect |
| A．pesticides in cotton farming cost over 4 billion dollars every year |
| B．C02 emissions of land transport amount to 1.15 pounds per mile |
| C．about 15% of the clothes and shoes are made of materials that are recycled |
| D．about 16, 000 gallons of water is used annually by an average family on laundry |
| A．The production process may affect water safety. |
| B．The clothing cost is relatively low in China and India. |
| C．Cotton clothes are buried because they are hard to break down. |
| D．The use stage is the least environmentally harmful of the five stages. |
| A．To encourage people to donate clothes to charity. |
| B．To promote eco-friendly actions related to clothes. |
| C．To persuade people to purchase more organic cotton. |
| D．To introduce the five stages in the lifecycle of clothing. |
3 . She looked up at me sadly, her pain unbearable obvious. I
I couldn’t help but think that these
Earlier that day, our group of forty high school students had learned that those endangered sea turtles were being
I had always been conscious of the damage our environment was suffering
| A．recognized | B．introduced | C．watched | D．satisfied |
| A．strange | B．missing | C．shining | D．complex |
| A．troublesome | B．rare | C．ugly | D．unfortunate |
| A．skillful | B．stubborn | C．intelligent | D．careless |
| A．studied | B．discovered | C．killed | D．displayed |
| A．because of | B．in case of | C．in spite of | D．apart from |
| A．report | B．lessen | C．escape | D．prove |
| A．so | B．but | C．or | D．and |
| A．see | B．predict | C．prevent | D．experience |
| A．boater | B．fisherman | C．visitor | D．turtle |
| A．pain | B．dirt | C．mask | D．sign |
| A．worry | B．harm | C．anger | D．shame |
| A．mention | B．form | C．change | D．check |
| A．describe | B．witness | C．investigate | D．benefit |
| A．donating | B．sharing | C．ignoring | D．recording |
| A．unless | B．before | C．while | D．though |
| A．wait | B．search | C．care | D．fight |
| A．need | B．place | C．chance | D．promise |
| A．running after | B．looking after | C．naming after | D．getting after |
| A．food | B．coin | C．litter | D．metal |
4 . Recently, we have already shown that climate change has led to a dramatic increase in storm surge risk in New York City, making devastating events like Hurricane Sandy more likely.
What can we say about the role of climate change in the unprecedented disaster that is unfolding in Houston with Hurricane Harvey? There are certain climate change-related factors that we can, with great confidence, say worsened the flooding.
Sea Level rise attributable to climate change-some of which is due to coastal subsidence(下沉) caused by human disturbance such as oil drilling-is more than half a foot(15cm) over the past few decades. That means the storm surge was half a foot higher than it would have been just decades ago, meaning far more flooding and destruction.
In addition to that, sea surface temperatures in the region have risen about 0.5℃(close to 1F) over the past few decades from roughly 30℃(86F) to 30.5℃(87F), which contributed to the very warm sea surface temperatures(30.5-31℃, or 87-88F). There is a simple thermodynamic(热力学的) relationship known as the Clausius-Clapeyron equation that tells us there is a roughly 3% increase in average atmospheric moisture content for each 0.5℃ of warming. Sea surface temperatures in the area where Harvey intensified were 0.5-1℃ warmer than current-day average temperatures, which translates to 1-1.5℃ warmer than “average” temperatures a few decades ago. That means 3-5% more moisture(水分) in the atmosphere. That large amount of moisture creates the potential for much greater rainfalls and greater flooding. The combination of coastal flooding and heavy rainfall is responsible for the devastating flooding that Houston is experiencing.
Not only are the surface waters of the Gulf of Mexico unusually warm right now, but there is a deep layer of warm water that Harvey was able to feed upon when it intensified at near record pace as it neared the coast. Human-caused warming is penetrating down into the ocean. It’s creating deeper layers of warm water in the Gulf and elsewhere. Harvey was almost certainly more intense than it would have been in the absence of human-caused warming, which means stronger winds, more wind damage and a larger storm surge.
Finally, the more tenuous but potentially relevant climate factors: part of what has made Harvey such a devastating(毁灭性的) storm is the way it has stalled near the coast. It continues to strike Houston and surrounding regions with a seemingly endless flood, which will likely top out at nearly 4ft(1.22m) of rainfall over a days-long period before it is done. The stalling is due to very weak prevailing winds, which are failing to steer the storm off to sea, allowing it to spin around and wobble back and forth. This pattern, in turn, is associated with a greatly expanded subtropical high pressure system over much of the US at the moment, with the jet stream pushed well to the north. This pattern of subtropical expansion is predicted in model simulations of human-caused climate change. More tenuous(微弱的), but possibly relevant still, is the fact that very persistent, nearly “stationary” summer weather patterns of this sort, where weather anomalies(both high-pressure dry hot regions and low-pressure stormy/rainy regions) stay locked in place for many days at a time, appears to be favoured by human-caused climate change.
In conclusion, while we cannot say climate change “caused” Hurricane Harvey, what we can say is that it exacerbated several characteristics of the storm in a way that greatly increased the risk of damage and loss of life. Climate change worsened the impact of Hurricane Harvey.
1. What’s the main purpose of writing the passage?| A．To offer tips on climate change. |
| B．To advocate paying more attention to current climate change urgently. |
| C．To share experiences on avoiding climate change. |
| D．To criticize human-caused climate change. |
| A．worsened | B．caused |
| C．favoured | D．increased |
| A．Climate change made Hurricane Harvey more deadly |
| B．Sea level rise sea and surface temperatures changed Hurricane Harvey |
| C．Hurricane Harvey and its characteristics |
| D．The climate change-related factors and human-caused warming |
I: Introduction CP: Central point P: Point Sp: Sub-point(次要点) C: Conclusion
A． | B． |
C． | D． |
5 . Smog in Europe and North America could be more than 25 times more deadly than the average air pollution found in Chinese cities, a new study suggests. In the largest ever study of its kind in the developing world, researchers tested the effects of air pollution on the health of people in 272 cities in China.
They found average annual exposure to fine particles, known as PM2.5, in those cities was more than five times higher than the level recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), according to a paper in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.
However they also discovered that it was much less likely to increase the death rate than PM2.5 in Europe and North America.
The researchers, led by Dr Maigeng Zhou, of the Chinese Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, suggested this was because China is affected by large amounts of natural dust blown by the wind from arid areas, while most pollution in the West comes from industry.
They found that for every increase of 10 micrograms of air pollution in a cubic meter of air, the mortality rate increased by 0.22 percent, discounting deaths from accidents.
Professor Frank Kelly, an expert in environmental health at King’s College London, who was not involved in the study but has studied air pollution in China, told The Independent: “Those relative risks are considerably less than those seen in Europe and the US. For mortality(死亡率) in Europe we are working on a six percent increase per 10 micrograms.” That suggests air pollution in Europe is about 27 times more toxic than average air pollution in China.
However, Professor Kelly said cities like Beijing, Shanghai and Hong Kong were likely to suffer from Western-style air pollution. "The natural dust component there is not of the magnitude that it would dwarf the coal, biomass and fossil fuel signals,” he said, “That may be true in certain cities whose pollution is not dominated by local power generation or major traffic congestion.”
Natural dust particles can cause physical damage to the lungs and trigger an asthma attack. Particles of carbon produced when fossil fuels are burned can lead to similar problems but they are also coated with toxic heavy metals, chemicals and volatile organic compounds. These are able to pass from the lungs into the blood stream where it is thought they cause further damage to the body.
Areeba Hamid, an air pollution campaigner with environmental group Greenpeace, said: “Poisonous air causes damage to people’s health wherever in the world they live. We now know fumes from diesel(柴油机) vehicles are a lot more poisonous than car companies claimed and this is a big cause of air pollution in Europe and North America. These companies have a lot to answer for, but so far they’ve managed to avoid any real accountability.”
The study of cities in China found the average annual expose to PM2.5 was 56 micrograms per cubic meter, compared to the WHO guideline limit for safe air quality of 10 micrograms.
People who were older than 75, had less education or who lived in hotter places were more likely to die. It is thought people in warmer cities were more likely to spend time outside or leave their windows open, thereby breathing more polluted air, the researchers said. They also speculated that less well educated people might have poorer access to health care or experience poorer environmental health conditions.
1. Why PM2.5 in China is less deadly than that in Europe and North America?| A．China is free from any pollution about PM2.5. |
| B．Pollutants affecting China mainly come from arid areas. |
| C．Fewer people died from PM 2.5 in China than those in Europe and North America. |
| D．Europe and North America are polluted by natural dust. |
| A．The average mortality rate. | B．The higher mortality rate. |
| C．The lower mortality rate. | D．The normal mortality rate. |
| A．Fumes from diesel vehicles are much more poisonous. |
| B．The environmental agencies can’t take on responsibilities. |
| C．The technology doesn’t meet the standards. |
| D．Car companies can’t evaluate the results. |
| A．appeal to people to lay an emphasis on environmental protection |
| B．illustrate smog in Europe and North America is quite serious |
| C．demonstrate China is safest place in the world to live in |
| D．provide some good ways to address the smog |
6 . Five meteorologists (气象学家) who were trapped for two weeks after polar bears surrounded their weather station are now able to leave after the creatures were chased away. Their supervisor told NBC News early Wednesday.
Russian officials had feared the siege could last for another month, the time it would take to reach the islands in the Kara Sea, high in the Arctic Circle. But on Tuesday night a research ship took a detour (绕道) to assist those weathermen, station supervisor Vasily Shevchenko told NBC News. The ship run by Russia’s state-run oil firm Rosneft frightened away the bears using its helicopter, before resupplying the weather station with more food and puppies (幼犬). The puppies are not yet big enough to deter the bears, but the station is planning to draft in a replacement adult guard dog as soon as possible.
Some of the bears had taken to sleeping directly outside the windows of remote outpost. There was no risk of the researchers starving because they had a year’s worth of food, but they were forced to take dangerous trips to a nearby building, holding a gun for protection, according to Shevchenko.
Polar bears are an endangered species. In Russia, it’s a crime to shoot them unless in self-defense. The bears usually leave the islands in the summer, but this time they were trapped by the melting ice, an apparent sign of climate change, according to Shevchenko. “They’ve stayed on the island because there is nowhere for them to go,” he said.
The animals suffer from global warming because it shrinks the floating ice that forms their main hunting ground. According to the environmental group the World Wide Fund for Nature, known as the WWF, this has got some polar bears to go near human habitats in search of food.
1. What did the research ship do to help the five meteorologists?| A．Drive them home. |
| B．Shoot all the bears. |
| C．Use its helicopter to scare the bears away. |
| D．Supply the weather station with more money. |
| A．stop | B．respect |
| C．protect | D．raise |
| A．Sea Pollution. | B．Climate change. |
| C．Humans’ hunting. | D．Animals’ hunting |
| A．People in Russia can hunt bear for money. |
| B．The melting ice will kill all the polar bears. |
| C．The five meteorologists hated the bears very much. |
| D．WWF made some contributions to protecting polar bears. |
7 . It’s always been a rule in my family, spoken or unspoken, that you don’t waste food. With six children herself and having grown up in an even larger family through the Great Depression, my mother would never tolerate throwing out the amounts of food we see routinely these days in the dumpster. We were told simply to clean our plates, no matter whether we liked the taste or if we were not hungry or not. So this subject is deep in my genes and upbringing.
Estimates are that nearly one third of all food produced is wasted. USDA estimates 31% of food available at retail (零售)level is wasted. 12% of landfill material is food. 28% of agricultural land produces food which is wasted, says the FAO. 18% of vegetables, and 12% of the apple crop are lost at the farm level in the United States., say experts.
Luckily, there’s an “ugly food” movement picking up steam. “Ugly” foods are those that sellers and buyers often reject because of their appearance, like misshapen vegetables and bruised（擦伤的） fruits. Farmers dump them. Supermarkets and restaurants reject them. Now supermarkets and restaurants reject them. Consumers historically have avoided them. Now supermarkets feature the ugly. It’s fashionable. More artful terms are favored. A French supermarket chain is selling “inglorious” foods. The British chain ASDA uses “wonky（歪斜的）” (which to American ears might sound as bad as “ugly.”) Canada’s Loblaws uses “naturally imperfect.” Celebrity chef Jamie Oliver, who has cast himself as a promoter of the “good food movement,” has signed on with some British chains to support their efforts.
With the effort of Kretschmann Farm CSA’s we’ve taken the line that rather than throw away things which would be classified by others as ugly, inglorious, or imperfect, we would just give them to you and you could decide. Either we throw them away, or you can. Oftentimes this adds to the volume of the box, or makes it a little more urgent to consume (because sometimes those rejected foods are just very ripe!).
1. When the author was a kid, he .| A．often suffered from hunger |
| B．was not allowed to waste food |
| C．had to wash plates after a meal |
| D．didn’t like the taste of his food |
| A．Coming to an end. |
| B．Facing a challenge. |
| C．Making a selection. |
| D．Becoming more popular. |
| A．provides perfect food for customers |
| B．sells food mot of which is very ripe |
| C．tries to bring ugly food to customers |
| D．encourage the consumption of food |
8 . Coffee drink is widespread. When people argue about whether coffee is good for health, they’re usually thinking of the health of the coffee drinker. Is it good for your heart? Does it increase blood pressure? Does it help you concentrate? However, coffee affects the health of the human population in other ways, too.
Traditionally, coffee bushes were planted under the shade of taller trees. However, more and more farmers in Latin America are deforesting the land to grow full sun coffees. At first, this increases production because more coffee bushes can be planted if there aren’t any trees. With increased production come increased profits.
Unfortunately, deforesting for coffee production immediately decreases the local wildlife habitat, because native birds nest and hide from predators（捕食者）in the tall trees and migrating birds rest there.
Furthermore, in the long term, the full-sun method also damages the ecosystem because more chemical fertilizers and pesticides（杀虫剂）are needed to grow the coffee. The fertilizers and pesticides kill insects that eat coffee plant, and then the birds eat the poisoned insects and also die. The chemicals kill or sicken other animals as well, and can even enter the water that people will eventually drink.
Fortunately, farmers in Central and South America are beginning to grow more coffee bushes in the shade. We can support these farmers by buying coffee with such labels as "shade-grown" and "bird-friendly".
Sure, these varieties might cost a little more. But we're paying for the health of the birds, the land, ourselves, and the planet. I think it’s worth it.
1. Which opinion does the author agree with?| A．People should buy full-sun coffee. |
| B．Shade-grown coffee should be supported. |
| C．Farmers should change the places to grow coffee. |
| D．Pesticides should be forbidden in coffee planting. |
| A．It can protect the ecosystem. |
| B．It can promote people's health. |
| C．It can provide mare nests for birds. |
| D．It can increase the production of coffee. |
| A．They cut down trees. |
| B．They move to other countries. |
| C．They turn grassland into farmland. |
| D．They buy more land from other farmers. |
| A．It is quite worthwhile to buy shade-grown coffee at any cost. |
| B．Farmers all have realized the importance of protecting the environment now. |
| C．South American farmers are taking action to plant coffee in the traditional way. |
| D．The full-sun method does good to the health of human beings in the long run. |
9 . What do people do with their old, out of date but still useful computers? Most people don’t know
Finally, some companies are thinking of ways
In some countries, laws have been passed, too. Computer companies have to pay for collecting and recycling their
Yet while many people are throwing away good computers, others cannot afford
好处：减少二氧化碳的排放，有利于缓解全球变暖；
具体建议：随手关掉不用的电器，如电灯、电视和电脑；
步行或骑自行车出行；如果路程远，乘坐公交车
购物时尽量使用环保布袋，不用一次性塑料袋。
大家都行动起来，我们就能与环境和谐共处。
注意： 词数不少于100；可适当增加细节，以使行文连贯。
参考词汇：二氧化碳排放 carbon dioxide emissions；一次性塑料袋disposable plastic bags
Nowadays,it is becoming common to lead a low-carbon lifestyle._______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
