1 . The number of fish caught just outside a recently expanded marine (海洋) protected area in Hawaii has risen. It is a sign that quadrupling (四倍) the size of the reserve in 2016 may have shored fish populations in the region.

When the Marine National Monument around Hawaii was enlarged to 1,510,000 square kilometers, marine conservationists around the world rejoiced.

Fishers may have felt differently, however, as fishing inside the area is not allowed. Yet by creating a space for dwindling tuna populations to recover, supporters argued, the reserve would benefit fisheries as well.

As populations inside the reserve boundaries steadily increased, they predicted, the fish would spill (溢出) over into the surrounding areas, increasing the amount of tuna available to catch.

Proving that is tricky, however, as tuna can’t be counted directly. Their numbers may rise or fall for a variety of reasons other than the expansion of a reserve. But the new study, published in Science this week, strongly suggests the number of fish caught just outside the MPA is higher now than it used to be.

Alan Friedlander, chief scientist for the National Geographic Society’s Pristine Seas project, calls the study a “very careful and strict test of spillover from marine protected areas.”

Importantly, says John Lynham, an environmental economist at the University of Hawaii and one of the study’s authors, the increase in tuna catches near the reserve held up even when looking at the average numbers caught by particular fishers. This shows the effect is not due to more effective crews now fishing local waters, he explains. To account for effort, catch numbers were divided by the ever-increasing number of fishing hooks in the area.

Lynham and colleagues found the catch per hook increased over the 10 years of the study. Fishers were catching on average six more yellowfin and five more bigeye tuna per year after the expansion than before.

“That last one, especially, was a surprise,” says Lynham, “because it is economically much more important, and there were fewer indications of an increase.”

2 . In shallow coastal waters of the Indian ocean, Dugong, a kind of sea cow, is in trouble. Environmental problems pose such a major threat to its survival that the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) upgraded the species’ extinction risk status(地位)to vulnerable (脆弱的).

Much worse, Dugongs are at risk of losing the protection of the Torres Strait Islanders, who have looked after them historically, hunting them for food sustainably and monitoring their numbers. These native people keep their biodiversity, and have deep knowledge about their environment. But these people are also threatened, in part because rising sea levels are making it difficult for them to live there.

This situation isn’t unique to Dugongs. A global analysis of 385 culturally important plant and animal species found 68 percent were both biologically vulnerable and at risk of losing their cultural protection.

The findings clearly illustrate that biology shouldn’t be the primary factor in shaping conservation policy,says anthropologist Victoria Reyes-García.When a culture declines,the species that are important to that culture are also threatened.“Lots of conservationists think we need to separate people from nature,” says Reyes-García. “But that strategy misses the caring relationship many cultural groups have with nature.”

One way to help shift conservation efforts is to give species a “bio-cultural status,”which would provide a fuller picture of their vulnerability. In the study, the team used a new way to determine a species’ risk of disappearing: the more a cultural group’s language use declines, the more that culture is threatened.The more a culture is threatened, the more culturally vulnerable its important species are. Researchers then combined a species’ cultural and biological vulnerability to arrive at its bio-cultural status. In the Dugong’s case, its bio-cultural status is endangered, meaning it is more at risk than its IUCN categorization suggests.

This new approach to conservation involves people that have historically cared for them. It can highlight when communities need support to continue their care. Scientists hope it will bring more efforts that recognize local communities’ rights and encourage their participation-taking advantage of humans’ connection with nature instead of creating more separation.

4 . The suburb I live in backs on to a large nature reserve. One morning I saw a koala (考拉) sitting in a palm tree in my front yard. I phoned around to ask what I could _________ this koala, but no one wanted to know. I ended up _________ the koala out of my tree and we crossed the road _________ for him to return to the nature reserve.

I’ve always been befriending animals. As a young kid I used to pick up lizard eggs and _________ them. It stimulated my interest as to why there wasn’t anyone wanting to come and _________ this koala in my tree. After that, I signed up for all the _________ I could find.

Once I had accreditation (合格证), I volunteered with the RSPCA in 2014, rehabilitating (使康复) wildlife. I was an ambulance driver, _________ overnight rescues. We rescued hundreds of animals and _________ more.

One day, I thought why not _________ my own rescue group focusing on my backyard? I purchased a two-acre property and built enclosures on it to __________ injured animals. Last year, I planted 300 eucalyptus trees(桉树), with seven varieties to __________ the koalas.

I cut the leaves of the eucalyptus trees for the koalas to eat and look after the __________ wildlife at our centre. If they recover, they are __________ back to where they come from.

As a kid I would never have imagined doing this. I feel like I’m the __________ girl on the planet that I get to do what I love. I believe it’s my __________.

5 . Have you noticed how evenings cool off more in rural areas than they do in cities? Urban areas also tend to get hotter during the day than any nearby areas with lots of greenery.    1    

It’s mainly caused by the difference in materials that cover the ground in urban areas and the countryside. In the country, evaporation(蒸发)of water from soil and the leaves of plants helps to cool the air.    2    Having fewer plants, cities have less evaporation and are unable to cool down the temperature.

Dark colours are another problem. Dark objects absorb all wavelengths of light, making the temperature increase more noticeably. In contrast, white objects reflect all wavelengths of light energy.    3    Sadly, most parts of cities are covered by asphalt(沥青), steel, roofs and bricks which are often dark in colour.

    4    As people drive cars, heat buildings, and run air conditioners, cities are generating waste heat and pouring it into the atmosphere directly. The waste heat adds to the solar energy trapped by the tall buildings.

But cities don’t have to be so hot. Some cities have lightened their streets. This is done by covering black asphalt streets, parking lots, and dark roofs with a more reflective gray coating.     5    

Having more green spaces also helps. Plants serve as a natural air conditioner. They catch heat, release vapour(蒸汽)into the air, and take away heat, contributing to cooler, fresher cities.

6 . The environmental practices of big businesses are shaped by a fundamental fact that offends our sense of justice. A business may maximize the amount of money it makes by damaging the environment and hurting people. When government regulation is effective, and the public is environmentally aware, environmentally clean big businesses may out-compete dirty ones, but the reverse is likely to be true if government regulation is ineffective and the public doesn’t care.

It is easy to blame a business for helping itself by hurting other people. But blaming alone is unlikely to produce change. It ignores the fact that businesses are not charities but profit-making companies, and they are under obligation to maximize profits for shareholders by legal means.

Our blaming of businesses also ignores the ultimate responsibility of the public for creating the conditions that let a business profit through destructive environmental policies. In the long run, it is the public, either directly or through its politicians, that has the power to make such destructive policies unprofitable and illegal, and to make sustainable environmental policies profitable.

The public can do that by accusing businesses of harming them. The public may also make their opinion felt by choosing to buy sustainably harvested products; by preferring their governments to award valuable contracts to businesses with a good environmental track record; and by pressing their governments to pass and enforce laws and regulations requiring good environmental practices.

In turn, big businesses can exert powerful pressure on any suppliers that might ignore public or government pressure. For instance, after the US public became concerned about the spread of a disease, transmitted to humans through infected meat, the US government introduced rules demanding that the meat industry abandon practices associated with the risk of the disease spreading. But the meat packers refused to follow these, claiming that they would be too expensive to obey. However, when a fast-food company made the same demands after customer purchases of its hamburgers dropped, the meat industry followed immediately. The public’s task is therefore to identify which links in the supply chain are sensitive to public pressure.

Some readers may be disappointed or outraged that I place the ultimate responsibility for business practices harming the public on the public itself. I also believe that the public must accept the necessity for higher prices for products to cover the added costs of sound environmental practices. My views may seem to ignore the belief that businesses should act in accordance with moral principles even if this leads to a reduction in their profits. But I think we have to recognize that, throughout human history, government regulation has arisen precisely because it was found that not only did moral principles need to be made explicit, they also needed to be enforced.

My conclusion is not a moralistic one about who is right or wrong, admirable or selfish. I believe that changes in public attitudes are essential for changes in businesses’ environmental practices.

7 . Solar farms offer one way to meet the world’s decarbonization targets, but they could also be used to deal with another of the planet’s big problems: loss of biodiversity. The approach is starting to take off. Residents of Barnsdale, for example, will soon play host to a new solar farm lined with grass field of wildflowers and native grasses, which Banks Group, the developer, says will promote pollinating insects.

The idea comes from the combination of two long-term trends: declining numbers of pollinating insects and the growing amount of land distributed to solar farms. According to the Center for Biological Diversity in Arizona, more than 40 percent of insect pollinators globally are listed as “highly threatened”—an issue that could seriously threaten food security. Meanwhile, solar-energy competence has been increasing. Matthew O’Neal, a scientist at Iowa State University, would like to see more solar developers seize this opportunity.

The benefits of such projects don’t stop at the insects. Research from Yale’s Center for Business and the Environment indicates that pollinator-friendly solar farms can raise crop output on nearby farmland, increase the recharging of groundwater and reduce soil erosion. In 2018, a US Department of Energy study found that if all existing and planned solar facilities near soybean and cranberry crops included pollinator home and increased output by just one percent, annual crop values could rise by US $1.75 million, US $4 million and US $233,000, respectively.

“Farmers could identify unprofitable areas, such as poor, highly erodible lands, as candidates for a pollinator-friendly solar farm. There’s the potential to increase their net income with pollinator motivation projects,” says O’Neal.

With enough forward thinking, these studies show, clean energy can provide new environmental opportunities. “We’re at a turning point with energy production and we’re seeing more opportunities to provide extra benefits that wouldn’t have been considered with older methods of energy generation,” says O’Neal. “You never heard of a coal mine planning pollinator conservation.”

This year, August 15th marked China’s first National Ecology Day,    1    aims to raise awareness of environmental protection and address unlawful activities and safeguard the development of forestry and grassland resource    2    law.

The establishment of National Ecology Day will enhance ecological understanding among the public and help the nation    3    (well) participate in global environment and climate governance.

The move     4    (see) as part of China’s efforts to build an ecological civilization, a concept that glorifies balanced and sustainable development and harmonious coexistence between    5    (human) and nature    6    promotes the building of a community with a shared future for mankind.

China’s laws and administrative regulations    7    (involve) the environment and ecology,    8    (base) on what environmental difficulties villagers are eager to solve and what ecological measures should be taken urgently from their opinions, have laid a solid legislative (立法的) foundation for the ecological civilization.

    9    makes Aug. 15 special is that on that day in 2005, the concept of “lucid waters and lush mountains” was first put forward, being    10    (value) assets.

A Tsinghua professor is leading authority on tackling global warming and public attention has been drawn     1     him for his clear message, Yang Feiyue reports.

Global warming, carbon footprints, the 2-degree limitation for temperature     2     (grow)...all those abstract terms are     3     (vivid) brought to life in Guan Dabo’s lecture.

In addition to his academic research and teaching work, the climate change economics professor from the Department of Earth System Science at Tsinghua University,has made a speech to     4     public.

“I’m a strong believer in environmental protection     5     (be) up to every individual,” Guan says.

His speech last year on I Am A Scientist, a multiplatform series of online articles and videos organized by the China Association for Science and Technology,     6     (enable) the audience to better understand how carbon consumption matters and relates to their own lifestyles.

“Since the industrial revolution, the burning of fossil fuels     7     ( release) much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. If we want to reduce the risks, we need to limit global warming to 2     8     even 1.5 degrees by the end of this century,” he adds.

In 2000, he chose     9     (pursue) environmental management with science at the University of Leeds in the United Kingdom. “I am naturally drawn to the environment,     10     is closely connected to our life,” he says.