1. What did the man do just now?
| A．He took some photos. | B．He did some reading. | C．He shared an article online. |
| A．Seafood will be polluted. |
| B．Ships won’t sail properly. |
| C．The beauty of the ocean will be damaged. |
| A．A reusable bag. | B．A metal straw. | C．A glass bottle. |
| A．Stop buying bottled water. |
| B．Organize beach cleanup events. |
| C．Participate in club activities every month. |
The international community
Japan’s action is seen as
The radioactive water is discharged into the Pacific resulting from the Fukushima nuclear leakage
On August 24, the Tokyo Electric Power Company,
3 . JP Morgan Chase, the world’s biggest fossil fuel funder, has noted in an internal report leaked to Extinction Rebellion that the company “cannot rule out catastrophic outcomes where human life as we know it is threatened.”
Most of the science inside the report is not shocking to the casual reader, but the analysis is most concerned about climate change caused by fossil fuel. These include possibilities like the sudden collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet, which would send sea levels more than 10 feet higher than current levels and displace millions of humans. Another terrible case is that the melting permafrost sends more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, causing more warming, and in turn more the melting of ice sheets, and carbon emissions. Of course, these are already happening. The real danger behind the motivation for this internal report lies in the possibility that the Earth’s climate could reach a tipping point.
Many believe the emergence of the internal report should serve as proof convincing enough for world leaders to take collective and decisive action. However, the attitude of many world governments towards the development of fossil fuel can surely make the global situation even worse for future generations now.
However, the report doesn’t mention other banks, or even JP Morgan itself, even though these institutions are often the ones blamed in enabling this crisis, according to a Gizmodo report. “Changes are occurring at the micro level, involving shifts in behavior by individuals, companies and investors,” says the Extinction Rebellion report. It goes on to suggest that these micro-level changes “will push emissions in the right direction,” but says nothing about government oversight, or actions that many believe is necessary to reverse the current course of the climate crisis.
It’s still half way even though one has made 90 miles out of a 100-mile journey. Humans may still fail the journey if they doesn’t persist to the last. Therefore, something will have to change at some point if the human race is going to survive.
1. What does Paragraph 2 mainly tell us about fossil fuel?| A．It may cause catastrophic outcomes. |
| B．It has nothing to do with climate changes. |
| C．It kills millions of humans every year. |
| D．It has sent sea levels 10 feet higher. |
| A．Ambitious. | B．Approving. | C．Constructive. | D．Opposed. |
| A．It’s never too late to act actively. |
| B．Many hands make light work. |
| C．A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. |
| D．A job half-done is still a job left unfinished. |
| A．A government report. | B．A science fiction. |
| C．A news report. | D．A health magazine. |
4 . Plastic is everywhere. A lot of it ends up in the ocean. Most plastics in the ocean break up into very small particles called “micro-plastics”—less than five millimeters in length or about the size of a sesame (芝麻) seed. It is the most common type of marine debris (垃圾) found in the ocean. Plastic debris can come in all shapes and sizes and be harmful to our ocean and water life.
Micro-plastics come from various sources, including larger plastic debris that degrades into smaller pieces. In addition, micro-beads, a type of smaller micro-plastic, are very tiny pieces of manufactured polyethylene (聚乙烯) plastic added as exfoliants (去角质剂) to health and beauty products,like toothpastes. These tiny particles easily pass through water systems and end up in the ocean, posing a potential threat to water life. What is worse, these micro-beads or plastic particles in the marine environment are eaten by plankton (浮游生物)，which are then eaten by fish. They continue to work their way up the food chain until they reach our dinner plates.
New research has shown that household dust is a more likely source of micro-plastics. According to researchers,114 pieces of micro-plastic settle on a dinner plate during the 20-minute duration of a meal. adding up to anywhere between 13,000 and 68,000pieces per year. And when you breathe in air, you could be breathing in the microscopic plastic particles as well.
How about drinking water? The non-profit journalism organization Orb Media tested 259 bottles of water bought from 9 different countries. The tests found that there was an average of 10. 4 plastic particles (0. 1 millimeters or larger) per liter of water. That level of micro-plastics in bottled water was double the level found in tap water. The findings suggest if you drink one liter of bottled water per day, you could be consuming tens of thousands of micro-plastic particles each year.
It is apparent that the problem of micro-plastics is still a huge one.
1. Where is the text probably taken from?| A．A science lecture. | B．A tourism brochure. |
| C．A wildlife website. | D．A water advertisement. |
| A．To state micro-plastics are eatable. | B．To show micro-plastics are common. |
| C．To prove micro-plastics are small. | D．To explain micro-plastics are light. |
| A．Plastic debris→ health products →plankton →micro-beads →fish →humans’ body |
| B．Plastic debris →health products →plankton →fish →micro-beads →humans’ body |
| C．Plastic debris →micro -beads →health products →plankton →fish →humans’ body |
| D．Plastic debris →micro-beads →health products →fish →plankton →humans’ body |
| A．The Harmful Effects of Micro-plastics | B．The Development of Plastics |
| C．The Polluted Drinking Water | D．The Measures to Protect the Oceans |
5 . The essence (本质) of fast fashion is to make clothes inexpensively and quickly, to get new trends and styles into stores and online as soon as possible, and it comes at a high social and environmental cost. Keeping production costs low means they can make their clothes cheap, using cheap labour in unsafe working conditions, and in countries with bad environmental regulations.
Throw-away culture is deeply rooted in our society; three in five of our clothing pieces are thrown out within a year. Fast fashion brands keep the consumers hungry and feeling like they need more by attracting them with newness and convincing the consumers that they need what they’re selling. This only results in increasing textile waste as people no longer want but throw it away.
Criticisms of the fast fashion industry include its negative environmental impact: water pollution, the use of toxic (有毒的) chemicals and increasing levels of textile waste. Textile dyeing is the second largest polluter of clean water globally, after agriculture. Fast fashion companies rely on their products being made cheaply and quickly, so they avoid talking when it comes to being aware of their impact on the environment. Greenpeace’s recent Detox Campaign showed that many brands use toxic and dangerous chemicals in their supply chains, and many of the chemicals are either banned or strictly controlled in lots of countries.
In conclusion, the fast fashion industry has a bad effect on our environment through fast fashion brands’ ecological practices and only continues to make the problem last for a long time in the future through extreme consumerist culture. In order for change to happen, the common people need to open their eyes and take measures to prevent the fast fashion from growing.
1. What’s one of the characteristics of fast fashion?| A．Causing a lot of anxiety. | B．Making people buy old clothes. |
| C．Selling most clothes through stores. | D．Producing clothes quickly. |
| A．They are mainly sold online. | B．They are made in unsafe countries. |
| C．They are made by cheap labour. | D．They save the cost of advertising. |
| A．Natural. | B．Surprising. | C．Absurd. | D．Puzzling. |
| A．Changing fast fashion brands’ working conditions. |
| B．Changing clothes stores’ sales model. |
| C．Introducing stricter laws for factories. |
| D．Raising public awareness of preventing fast fashion. |
6 . The tradition of giving gifts didn’t start with the modern holidays we celebrate. Many ancient cultures celebrated holidays with the exchange of gifts. People who love to give gifts often can’t wait until it’s time for the recipients to open their gifts. If you’ve ever been given a gift, you know that part of the fun is the curiosity that builds as you wonder what the gift is.
The wish to hide the identity of a gift until just the right moment led people to wrap gifts long, long ago. Historians believed wrapping gifts in paper probably started not long after paper was invented thousands of years ago.
Wrapping paper like what we use today, though, is a much more recent invention. More than 100 years ago, gifts were usually wrapped in heavy brown paper. Before that, cloth was often used. The technology to mass-produce wrapping paper didn’t come along until the early 1900s. The first American gift wrap company— Hy-Sill Manufacturing Inc. — was founded by Eli Hyman and Morris Silverman in 1903. It wasn’t as easy to wrap presents back then as it is today, though, because adhesive tape (胶带) wasn’t invented until 1930.
Over the years, wrapping paper has developed into what we see in stores each holiday season. But scientists say that the United States alone produces an extra 5 million tons of waste over the holidays, most of which is from wrapping paper and shopping bags. To cut down on this waste, some people carefully unwrap presents, so that the wrapping paper can be reused. Others have started to use reusable gift bags instead of wrapping paper.
1. What is the interesting part of people giving a gift?| A．Hiding their gifts and their feelings. |
| B．Giving the recipients a surprise. |
| C．Letting the recipients open gifts at once. |
| D．Following a century-old tradition. |
| A．People didn’t know wrapping paper until 1903. |
| B．Heavy brown paper has been used to wrap gifts for 100 years. |
| C．Technology made wrapping paper widely available. |
| D．Adhesive tape was first created by gift wrap companies. |
| A．The future of reusable gift bags. |
| B．The waste produced by Americans. |
| C．Wrapping paper’s influence on the environment. |
| D．People’s admiration for wrapping paper. |
| A．The popularity of wrapping gifts. |
| B．The start of wrapping gifts in paper. |
| C．The problems caused by wrapping paper. |
| D．The story behind wrapping paper. |
7 . Compared with the obvious environmental issues we hear about every day, littering often takes a backseat-but it’s more pressing than we may think.
Some may say that a banana peel out of your car along the motorway would be a harmless action. Actually, they are wrong. A banana peel can take up to two years to decompose(分解)，and with a third of motorists admitting to littering while driving, that’s a whole lot of discarded banana peels, or much worse. An orange peel and a cigarette butt has a similar biodegrading(生物降解)term to that of a banana, but tin and aluminium cans last up to 100 years, and plastic bottles last forever, so do glass bottles and plastic bags.
Despite the fact that longer-lasting materials will serve to damage the environment and its animals for longer, we can’t only measure the severity of a certain type of rubbish by its lifetime. For example, despite having a fairly short biodegrading span, more than 120 tons of cigarette-related litter is thrown away in the UK every day. Similarly, our regular littering here and there has caused the UK’s mouse population to increase by 60 million. This suddenly isn’t so mysterious when you consider that since the 1960s our annual littering has increased by an amazing 500%.
It’s not a cheap habit either: UK taxpayers spent $500 million on keeping the streets clean. So, it’s not surprising that if caught fly-tipping, you could face a $20, 000 fine. Regardless of how severe the punishment might seem, however, among the reported cases only 2, 000 were punished out of 825, 000, so we still have some way to go in making sure people observe the rules.
To take back our beautiful cities, we need to do more than simply not leaving rubbish where it ought not to be. We need to care more about the world around us.
1. Which of the following is easiest to decompose ?| A．An aluminium can. | B．A plastic bag. |
| C．An orange peel. | D．A glass bottle. |
| A．Annual littering has increased a little in UK since the 1960s. |
| B．Shorter-lasting materials will be less harmful to the environment. |
| C．Cigarette-related litter is a severe environmental problem in UK. |
| D．Regular littering has caused the UK’s mouse population to reach 60 million. |
| A．Every little helps. | B．A drop in the bucket. |
| C．No pains, no gains. | D．Fear is often greater than the danger. |
| A．Littering, a surprisingly big issue. |
| B．Environment issue, a big concern. |
| C．Long-lasting material, a hidden danger. |
| D．Rubbish collection, an urgent task. |
8 . More than a million tons a year of America's plastic rubbish are not ending up where they should. As many as 1, 300 plastic grocery bags per person is landing in places such as oceans and roadways, according to a new study of U. S.
In 2016, the United States generated 46.3 million tons of plastic waste, by far the most in the world. Between2.7% and 5. 3% of that was mismanaged, according to a study in Friday's journal Science Advances. “If you took nearly 2. 5 million tons of mismanaged plastic waste and dumped it on the White House lawn, it would pile as high as the Empire State Building,” said Jenna Jambeck, an environmental engineering professor.
Previous studies hadn't put the United States among the 10 worst offending nations for plastic waste in oceans. That's because the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency only tracks what goes into official parts of the waste stream such as landfills (废物填埋场) and recycling centers.
“The new study provides a more realistic view of our mismanaged waste,” said University of Toronto ecology professor Chelsea Rochman, who wasn't part of the study. “We consume a lot of plastic which then becomes plastic waste. We recycle very little of this material, which is a waste of resources.”
“A large but hard to quantify part of the problem involves the 51% of U. S. plastic waste shipped abroad for recycling to countries that routinely mismanage waste," Law said. The situation has been converting since many countries have become more limiting about taking U. S. rubbish imports. American exports of plastic waste have declined dramatically since their peak in 2016.
The government is spending billions of dollars trying to fix the problem, with modernized recycling technology and new business models to reduce waste while urging compulsory recycled content standards for new products and packaging.
“The best thing you can do environmentally is to produce no waste at all,” Jambeck said.
1. What can we know about the plastic waste in America?| A．It is improperly dealt with. | B．It is increasing every year. |
| C．It is as high as a tall building. | D．It is finding its way into landfills. |
| A．How plastic waste is managed officially. | B．Why all plastic waste isn't recycled. |
| C．When plastic waste reaches its peak. | D．Where all plastic waste finally ends up. |
| A．continuing | B．changing | C．existing | D．affecting |
| A．The lack of capital for waste management. | B．The lack of modern technology. |
| C．The limit of waste exports. | D．The seriousness of waste. |
9 . You’ve heard that plastic is polluting the oceans — between 4.8 and 12.7 million tonnes enter ocean ecosystems every year. But does one plastic straw or cup really make a difference? Artist Benjamin Von Wong wants you to know that it does. He builds massive sculptures out of plastic garbage, forcing viewers to re-examine their relationship to single-use plastic products.
At the beginning of the year, the artist built a piece called “Strawpocalypse,” a pair of 10-foot-tall plastic waves, frozen mid-crash. Made of 168,000 plastic straws collected from several volunteer beach cleanups, the sculpture made its first appearance at the Estella Place shopping center in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Just 9% of global plastic waste is recycled. Plastic straws are by no means the biggest source (来源) of plastic pollution, but they’ve recently come under fire because most people don’t need them to drink with and, because of their small size and weight, they cannot be recycled. Every straw that’s part of Von Wong’s artwork likely came from a drink that someone used for only a few minutes. Once the drink is gone, the straw will take centuries to disappear.
In a piece from 2018, Von Wong wanted to illustrate (说明) a specific statistic: Every 60 seconds, a truckload’s worth of plastic enters the ocean. For this work, titled “Truckload of Plastic,” Von Wong and a group of volunteers collected more than 10,000 pieces of plastic, which were then tied together to look like they’d been dumped (倾倒) from a truck all at once.
Von Wong hopes that his work will also help pressure big companies to reduce their plastic footprint.
1. What are Von Wong’s artworks intended for?| A．Beautifying the city he lives in. | B．Introducing eco-friendly products. |
| C．Drawing public attention to plastic waste. | D．Reducing garbage on the beach. |
| A．To show the difficulty of their recycling. |
| B．To explain why they are useful. |
| C．To voice his views on modern art. |
| D．To find a substitute for them. |
| A．Calming. | B．Disturbing. |
| C．Refreshing. | D．Challenging. |
| A．Artists’ Opinions on Plastic Safety |
| B．Media Interest in Contemporary Art |
| C．Responsibility Demanded of Big Companies |
| D．Ocean Plastics Transformed into Sculptures |
增加：在缺词处加一个漏字符号（∧），并在其下面写出该加的词。
删除：把多余的词用斜线（\）划掉。
修改：在错的词下划一横线，并在该词下面写出修改后的词。
注意：
1. 每处错误及其修改均仅限一词；
2. 只允许修改10处，多者（从第11处起）不计分。
As we all know, over seventy percent of our planet are covered by sea, where is rich in salt as well as fish. What’s more, there is a great deal of oil or gas under the sea. In other words, the sea is the place with so many important things we live in. However, with the world population increased rapidly, overfishing has become a serious problem. Every day a lot of rubbishes and waste water are poured into the sea, so the sea is bad polluted. As the result, the number of fish has obviously decreased. Besides, some are dying out or have been died out.
Therefore, it is time for everybody protect the sea.
