Researchers say they have found microplastics (微塑料) -tiny pieces of plastic that come as a result of the disposal of industrial waste-deep in the lungs of living
The research, which
In the study, researchers
The study notes
The world produces about 300 million metric tons of plastic a year and about 80% ends
2 . The idea of turning recycled plastic bottles into clothing is not new. During the last five years, a large number of clothing companies, businesses and environmental organizations have started turning plastics into fabric to deal with plastic pollution. But there’s a problem with this method. Research now shows that microfibers could be the biggest source of plastic in the sea.
Dr. Mark Browne in Santa Barbara, California, has been studying plastic pollution and microfibers for 10 years now. He explains that every time synthetic clothes go into a washing machine, a large number of plastic fibers fall off. Most washing machines can’t collect these microfibers. So every time the water gets out of a washing machine, microfibers are entering the sewers and finally end up in the sea.
In 2011, Browne wrote a paper stating that a single piece of synthetic(合成的) clothing can produce more than 1, 900 fibers per wash. Browne collected samples from seawater and freshwater sites around the world, and used a special way to examine each sample. He discovered that every single water sample contained microfibers.
This is bad news for a number of reasons. Plastic can cause harm to sea life when eaten. Studies have also shown that plastic can absorb other pollutants.
Based on this evidence, it may seem surprising that companies and organizations have chosen to turn plastic waste into clothing as an environmental “solution.” Even though the science has been around for a while, Browne explains that he's had a difficult time getting companies to listen. When he asked well-known clothing companies to support Benign by Design-his research project that seeks to get clothes that have a bad effect on humans and the environment out of the market, Browne didn’t get a satisfying answer. Only one women’s clothing company, Eileen Fisher, offered Browne funding.
1. What has happened during the past five years?| A．Fabric has become much stronger. | B．Plastic pollution has been less serious. |
| C．Many plastic bottles have been reused. | D．Microfibers have been greatly improved. |
| A．It is adding microfibers to the clothes. |
| B．It is worsening environmental problems. |
| C．It is making synthetic clothes last longer. |
| D．It is doing great damage to washing machines. |
| A．It has achieved great success. | B．It hasn’t got anything done. |
| C．It is known to very few people. | D．It is facing some difficulties. |
| A．It’s important to learn to recycle |
| B．It’s never easy to solve pollution problems |
| C．Recycled plastic clothing: solution or pollution? |
| D．Are human beings moving forward or backward? |
Though many foreign experts said Japan’s water discharge would have a slight impact
In South Korea, fierce domestic political
4 . Today, Mount Qomolangma’s peak is not a lonely place any more. Over 3500 people have
In fact, the dangerous
But the good news is
Some of that rubbish is even being used for
5 . Improved air quality to reduce ozone (臭氧) pollution may have avoided the loss of 1.5 billion birds during the past 40 years, a study found. That’s nearly 20% of bird life in the United States today.
Ozone, a gas that appears in nature, is also produced by human activities, including by power plants and cars. The ozone in the upper atmosphere protects the Earth from the harmful ultraviolet rays (紫外线) of the sun. But ground-level ozone is harmful and pollutes the air we breathe.
To examine the relationship between bird populations and air pollution, the researchers used models that connected bird observations from the Cornell Lab of Ornithology’s eBird program with ground-level pollution data. They tracked monthly changes in bird populations, air quality, and regulation status (治理现状) for 3,214 US counties over a period of 15 years. The findings suggest that ozone pollution is most harmful to the small birds — such as sparrows, warblers and finches — that make up 86% of all North American land-bird species. Ozone pollution directly harms birds by damaging their breathing systems, and indirectly harms their food sources.
“Not only can ozone cause direct physical damage to birds, but it also can harm plant health and reduce numbers of the insects that birds eat,” said co-author Amanda Rodewald. “Not surprisingly, birds that cannot get high-quality habitat or food resources are less likely to survive or reproduce successfully. The good news here is that environmental policies intended to protect human health and return important benefits to birds too.”
This work contributes to our ever increasing understanding of the connection of environmental health and human health.
1. How many birds are there in the United States now?| A．0.75 billion. | B．1.5 billion. |
| C．3 billion. | D．7.5 billion. |
| A．Ozone pollution harms birds’ food sources indirectly. |
| B．86% of North American land-bird species are extinct. |
| C．3,214 counties in America have effective regulations. |
| D．The researchers have observed birds for many years. |
| A．Worried. | B．Positive. |
| C．Uncaring. | D．Doubtful. |
| A．Ground-Level Ozone Makes up Most of the Air We Breathe |
| B．Environmental Policies Intend to Protect Human Health |
| C．Reduced Ozone Pollution May Have Avoided Bird Deaths |
| D．Regulations Bring Important Protection Benefits to Birds |
6 . As our boat moves quickly up and down in a windy ice-filled small bay, I try to judge the health condition of the polar bear (北极熊)in front of me. We are in Franz Josef Land, a remote part of Russia between the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean.
While offshore bears follow the sea ice, hunting seals (海豹)on ice all year round, bears that live by the sea spend their summers on land and are forced to search for whatever they can find. Relying on low-calorie meals such as the eggs of nesting seabirds, it is harder for these bears to pack on the pounds. Researchers recently found that offshore bears around the Barents Sea are some of the most polluted animals on Earth. This is a direct consequence of the seals they feed on.
Over a period of 14 years' study, Heli Routti from the Norwegian Polar Institute found that offshore female bears were in a better health, having greater body weight, than female bears by the sea, but on average their levels of pollutants called PFASs are 33 percent higher.
PFASs are used to make industrial products which are poisonous and degrade (降解)very slowly. These pollutants find their way to the Arctic through air, where they fall in snow and gradually add up in the ice. As the ice melts every summer, the PFASs go into the water, where they enter the food chain. They eventually make their way into the fat that keeps seals warm and from there into the bears that eat them.
During my 15 days in Franz Josef Land, I saw five bears, all living by the sea. Each looked relatively healthy. There are signs that these bears are dealing with the global-warming-caused ice loss relatively well. “The bears, so far, seem to be handling the sea ice loss,” says Andrew Derocher at the University of Alberta, who worked with Routti on the study, “But I'm sure that's going to change if the speed of ice loss increases sharply in the area.”
1. From the text we can learn polar bears living by the sea ________.| A．eat seals on ice all year round |
| B．look for food on land in summer |
| C．become the most polluted animals on Earth |
| D．stay on the ice in summer to avoid hot weather |
| A．Put on weight. | B．Move around. |
| C．Fight against pollution. | D．Live alone. |
| A．The rate of PFASs' degradation. | B．The effects of PFASs on the environment. |
| C．The process of PFASs' entering polar bears. | D．The application of PFASs in modern industry. |
| A．More pollutants may go into the air. | B．It will make no difference to bears. |
| C．The death rate of seals may increase. | D．Bears might fail to adapt to the change. |
