1 . 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 |
2 . Kenya has been at the forefront (前沿) of the global war on plastic since the government banned single-use plastics in protected areas in June 2020. Unfortunately, the preventive measures have barely received attention. Hundreds of tons of industrial and consumer polymer waste continue to get dumped into landfills daily. However, if 29-year-old Nzambi Matee has her way, the unsightly plastic heaps will soon be transformed into colorful bricks.
The materials engineer’s seeking to find a practical solution to control plastic pollution began in 2017. She quit her job and set up a small lab in her mother’s backyard. It took her nine months to produce the first brick and even longer to convince a partner to help build the machinery to make them. But the determined eco-entrepreneur was confident in her idea and did not give up.
She says, “I wanted to use my education to handle plastic waste pollution. But I was very clear that the solution had to be practical, sustainable, and affordable. The best way to do this was by channeling the waste into the construction space and finding the most efficient and affordable material to build homes.” Her company produces over 1,500 bricks a day. The pavers are made using a mix of plastic products that cannot be reprocessed or recycled.
The collected plastic is mixed with sand, heated at very high temperatures, and compressed (压缩) into bricks that vary in color and thickness. The resulting product is stronger, lighter, and about 30 percent cheaper than concrete bricks. More importantly, it helps repurpose the lowest quality of plastic. “There is that waste they cannot process anymore; they cannot recycle. That is what we get.” Matee says.
Matee is not nearly done. Her dream is to reduce the mountain of trash to just a hill by increasing production and expanding her offerings. She says, “The more we recycle the plastic, the more we produce affordable housing, the more we created more employment for the youth.”
1. What does the underlined sentence in paragraph 1 imply?| A．Matee’s method can be effective if adopted. | B．Matee’s idea has been widely accepted. |
| C．Colorful bricks are in huge demand. | D．Plastic waste hasn’t attracted enough attention. |
| A．Generous and ambitious. | B．Confident and grateful. |
| C．Creative and resolved. | D．Optimistic and modest. |
| A．to build cheaper houses. | B．to support the government. |
| C．to create job opportunities. | D．to tackle plastic pollution. |
| A．Kenya: Pioneer in Banning Plastic Single-use Plastics |
| B．Nzambi Matee: Innovator in Solving Plastic Waste |
| C．Mix of Plastic Products: A New Construction Material |
| D．Plastic Recycling: A Creative Solution to Pollution |
3 . Last week came solid evidence that living in toxic Britain can seriously harm your health. Cardiologists at Queen Mary University of London found that even "safe" levels of air pollution are linked to heart abnormalities similar to those seen during the early stages of heart failure. Their study of almost 4,000 people was backed up by a major US study which showed that higher exposure to fine particles and nitrogen oxides is linked to an acceleration in the hardening of the arteries (动脉).
We have long known that air pollution leads to coughing, shortness of breath and irritation in the eyes, nose and throat. It is also clearly linked to respiratory diseases such as asthma and bronchitis, as well as diabetes and some cancers. It is now beyond doubt that children's health is greatly affected, and links have been made between it and Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, dementia and congenital birth defects.
The statistics are alarming. In the UK, more than 2 million people suffer from cardiovascular (心血管的) diseases, and nearly one in seven men and one in 12 women will go on to die from them. Heart disease costs the UK economy nearly £30 bn a year to treat, as much as the state spends on secondary education. It is one of the greatest single drains on the public purse. Britain, however, rejects common sense, and shows little sign that it wants to seriously address pollution any time soon.
Despite the mounting evidence of air pollution's costs and health impact, Britain has had to be dragged screaming through the courts to make it comply with minimal clean air guidelines and laws. Successive governments have continually tried to evade their legal responsibilities, spending millions of pounds fighting in the courts and lobbying the EU to be allowed to continue to pollute.
The government now has a new draft clean air strategy our for consultation until 14 August and claims to be acting faster to tackle air pollution than almost every other major developed economy. It pledges to halve the number of people living in places that do not meet World Health Organization pollution guidelines, and it propose to end the sale of new diesel and petrol cars and vans by 2040.
But intending to cut the air pollution bill by around 12.5% in 12 years and waiting 20 years to be rid of the worst vehicles seems criminally weak. Meanwhile, government is knowingly forging ahead with infrastructure plans that will inevitably increase air pollution. The effect will inevitably be to massively increase air pollution and health costs for millions of Britons.
So could the car-clogged streets of Sunder-land, Birmingham and London, where I lived for many years, have contributed to my disease and those of millions of others? Probably. Could the oil companies be responsible for far more than climate change? Certainly. Could Britain's monstrous and mounting bill for heart disease be partly due to the highly polluting diesel cars that governments so scandalously encouraged us to drive? Quite possibly.
What is certain is that air pollution is now an international scandal, and the cause of a health emergency that governments and industry have failed to address. It undoubtedly threatens life more than any war or disaster. When there are clear alternatives to burning fossil fuels then politicians who do not act to prevent it must stand accused not just of failing to act, but of condoning the mass poisoning of their people.
1. According to the study, ________ is probably unrelated to air pollution.| A．diabetes | B．stomachaches | C．Alzheimer | D．artery hardening |
| A．British government has been screaming for help in court |
| B．EU has dissuaded British government for help in court |
| C．British government has tried to have EU's permission for more pollution |
| D．The government firmly refused to act in accordance with the clean air guideline. |
| A．Britain will implement it faster than other major developed economies. |
| B．It presents a practical way to end pollution from vehicles. |
| C．Its goal will be achieved at the price of massive health cost. |
| D．It's aiming too low when more pollution is expected. |
| A．Government officials should feel disgraced for non-action as leaders. |
| B．The government should cover the bills for air pollution and related diseases. |
| C．Oil companies should not be held accountable for the international scandal. |
| D．British government is an irresponsible one for encouraging people to use vehicles. |
4 . Of all the weird and wonderful creatures living under the sea, perhaps the strangest are jellyfish—those rubbery, cone-shaped creatures found floating in the water, their long tentacles trailing behind.
Some jellyfish species have a bad reputation for scaring away tourists, clogging up fishing nets, and even blocking power station pipes. But with more and more plastic rubbish ending up in the sea, these days you’re as likely to swim into a plastic bag as a jellyfish. Now scientific research is discovering that these rubbery sea creatures might provide an answer—a sticky solution to the problem of plastic pollution.
In recent years, tiny pieces of plastic called microplastic have been a significant problem for the world’s seas and oceans. These plastics are not visible to the eye and aren’t caught by seawater treatment plants due to their small size, so they enter our system and harm our health. They’ve been found in many places—in Arctic ice, at the bottom of the sea and even inside animals. Slovenian scientist, Dr Ana Rotter, heads GoJelly, a European research team of jellyfish ecologists looking into the problem.
Microplastics, plastics in general, are becoming an increasing problem. Dr Ana Rotter says when she was a child, people were more environmentally friendly—not harmful to the environment or having the least possible impact on it. At that time, there were very few single-use plastics—plastic items, like spoons and forks, designed to be used just once, then thrown away. The situation since then has changed dramatically. In fact, there’s been such an increase in microplastics that today the UN lists plastic pollution as one of the world’s top environmental threats.
But how do jellyfish fit into the story? Well, it’s the ‘jelly’ part of jellyfish, and specifically their sticky, jelly-like mucus that is key. Jellyfish produce a thick, sticky liquid called mucus. Dr Ana Rotter has discovered that this mucus has strong absorptive capabilities—it can absorb, take in liquids and other substances. One of the substances jellyfish mucus absorbs are the particles that make up microplastics.
Dr Rotter’s research is still in the early stages, but it’s hoped that jellyfish mucus could hold the key to a future free of microplastic polluted oceans. Scientists are hoping that the mucus’s absorptive properties—its abilities to absorb liquids and other substances and hold them, will allow it to trap particles of plastic floating in the sea. By trapping these, the mucus acts like a magnet—an object that attracts certain materials, like metal, but in this case, microplastic waste.
1. Paragraph 3 mainly talks about ________.| A．where microplastics can be found |
| B．why microplastics can harm our health |
| C．what problems the seas and oceans are facing |
| D．how the research was carried out by the scientist |
| A．Jellyfish species cause a great threat to the sea. |
| B．Jellyfish species like to swim and live in plastic bags. |
| C．Jellyfish mucus can attract metals and break them down. |
| D．Jellyfish mucus can absorb liquids and some other substances. |
| A．Qualities. | B．Substances. | C．Choices. | D．Materials. |
| A．To show the harm that sea and ocean pollution brings to human beings. |
| B．To introduce the living habits of the weird and wonderful creatures in the sea. |
| C．To provide a new method for collecting data on environmental threats in the sea. |
| D．To inform a promising scientific finding for dealing with plastic pollution in the sea. |
5 . Lithium (锂) is called “white gold” for good reason. The metal’s value has been growing sharply over the last several years, in a large part because it is an essential part of batteries as well as several key sustainable technologies where energy storage is of huge significance. As electric cars, wind and solar power have grown into major players in the energy industry, lithium has become key to engineering a future free of fossil (化石) fuels.
But acquiring lithium comes at an enormous cost. It often works like this: Water containing lithium is delivered to the surface from underground and mixed with fresh water. The mixture then sits in pools to get rid of water, leaving the rest of its contents behind as brightly colored “mud”. Then heat and chemical reactions are used to get lithium from that, changing it into powder which is then packaged and shipped to buyers around the world.
Any accident that releases mine contents into surrounding communities or the groundwater supply could have unimaginable long-term impacts. To be specific, indigenous (土著的) communities often bear the damage, and political leaders have typically given little weight to their concerns. In Arizona, for example, an expanding lithium mine is threatening the Hualapai Tribe’s cultural and historic sites. Recently, mining lithium and other precious metals has brought about conflict: How do you ensure the availability of materials essential to the future of renewables while protecting those communities’ rights?
Mining of the metal is expected to increase dramatically in coming years. Over time, experts say, that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions (排放) by making electric cars more affordable and, therefore, more popular. As environmentally conscious consumers buy electric cars in ever-greater numbers, it’s important to be aware of the dirty process that powers those clean air vehicles.
1. What does the author’s intention of writing Paragraph 1?| A．To introduce the background of an event. | B．To explain a complex industrial theory. |
| C．To describe a noticeable recent tendency. | D．To predict the future of a main technology. |
| A．Unexpected material leak. | B．Violent chemical reactions. |
| C．Wrong political decisions. | D．Lithium mine expansion. |
| A．Intolerant. | B．Uncaring. | C．Favorable. | D．Objective. |
| A．High Expense of Lithium Mining | B．Potential Benefit of Using Lithium |
| C．Hidden Threat behind Clean Energy | D．Bright Future of Renewable Resources |
6 . There is increasing alarm about the extent of microplastic pollution, which has been found everywhere from Everest to the Arctic. However, it turns out there’s an even smaller and more toxic form of plastic pollution entering remote reaches of the globe. A new study published in Environmental Research found significant quantities of nanoplastics in ice samples from both the North and South Poles.
“Now we know that nanoplastics are transported to these comers of the Earth in these quantities. This indicates that nanoplastics are really a bigger pollution problem than we thought,” study lead author Dusan Materic said in a press release.
Nanoplastics are plastics that are smaller than a micrometer in size. Their small size means they are more difficult to study than microplastics, or plastics between five millimeters and a micrometer. But they may be even more dangerous.
“Nanoplastics are very toxicologically active compared to, for instance, microplastics, and that’s why this is very important,” Materic said.
Materic and his team used new methods to measure nanoplastic pollution in ice samples from Greenland and Antarctica. They sampled a 14-meter-deep ice core from the Greenland ice cap and sea ice from Antarctica’s McMurdo Sound. They found that there were an average of 13. 2 nanograms per milliliter of nanoplastics in the Greenland ice and an average of 52. 3 nanograms per milliliter in the Antarctic ice.
But what was even more surprising than the amount of nanoplastics in the remote ice was just how long they had sat there. “In the Greenland core, we see nanoplastic pollution happening all the way from the 1960s. So organisms, despite the lack of the solid evidence, likely all over the world, have been exposed to it for quite some time now,” Materic said.
The study also looked at the types of plastic present in the samples. Half of the Greenland nanoplastics were polyethylene (PE), the kind of plastic used for plastic bags and packaging. A quarter came from tires and a fifth were polyethylene terephthalate (PET), which is used for clothing and bottles.
1. Why should researchers focus more on nanoplastics?| A．They are more important to science. |
| B．They are smaller but more dangerous. |
| C．They are easily polluted by ocean water. |
| D．They are more active in cold surroundings. |
| A．The North and South poles are the birthplace of nanoplastics. |
| B．Nanoplastics have less influence on the planet than microplastics. |
| C．Nanoplastics found in the samples are widely used in the daily life. |
| D．Nanoplastics have been existing since the 1960s throughout the world. |
| A．The Greenland core. |
| B．The Antarctic ice. |
| C．The amount of nanoplastics. |
| D．Nanoplastics pollution. |
| A．Microplastics-proving more dangerous. |
| B．Nanoplastics-making its way to the poles. |
| C．Nanoplastics-posing a threat to people’s life. |
| D．Microplastics-setting the alarm bells ringing. |
Japan said on Tuesday that it had decided to
The
“The Japanese government ignores concerns and strong opposition both at home and abroad. Such an
Greenpeace(绿色和平组织)criticized Japan’s plan and said there are other solutions that should
8 . According to US national park researchers, microplastic particles (微粒) equal to as many as 300 million plastic water bottles are raining down on the Grand Canyon.
In a survey of 11 remote western places, also including the Great Basin and Craters of the Moon national parks, researchers discovered more than 1000 tons of microplastic particles that had traveled through the atmosphere via rain or water particles.
Most microplastics are from larger pieces of plastic. Since plastics don’t degrade (降解), plastics that end up in waste piles or landfills break down into microparticles and make their way through the Earth’s atmosphere, soil and water systemics.
Janice Brahney, lead researcher at Utah State University, said, “Plastics could be deposited (沉降), readmitted to the atmosphere again, transported for some time…who knows how many times, and who knows how far they’ve traveled?”
Brahney’s team found that so-called wet microplastics, named for the way they are transported, are most likely disturbed by a storm and swept up into the atmosphere, having originated in larger urban areas. By comparison, the spreading patterns of dry microplastics is the same as dust and can travel long distances, often across continents.
Brahney warned that new findings show an urgent need to reduce plastic pollution. Although their full effects on the human body are still unknown, scientists are starting to raise public health concerns over microplastic particles: They’re small enough to stay in lung tissue, causing damage and, in some cases of routine exposure, can lead to asthma and cancer.
Scientists have also found that microplastic particles affect the temperature adjustment function of the soil, leading to losses in plant life.
Brahney believes that her research is just the beginning of understanding how microplastics move through ecosystems.
“Learning about plastics and how they don’t degrade seems like, ‘Oh my God, we should have been expecting this: they’ re just made into these tiny sizes, they could certainly be carried by the wind,” Brahney said.
“We’ve just been missing it,” she added.
1. The direct cause of the microplastic rain is that_________.| A．small pieces from plastics become degradable |
| B．microplastic particles travel into the atmosphere |
| C．plastic particles end up in waste piles or landfills |
| D．plastic water bottles are transported to the water systems |
| A．The structure of microplastic particles. |
| B．The distance that microplastics can travel. |
| C．The way that microplastics are transported. |
| D．The different types of microplastic particles. |
| A．Microplastics have affected the ecosystem. |
| B．Plastic particles have serious effects on human health. |
| C．Methods to degrade plastics could be developed soon. |
| D．Researchers have missed the best time to study plastics. |
| A．Favorable. | B．Uncaring. |
| C．Doubtful. | D．Worried. |
9 . To solve a big environmental problem, chemists have been thinking small. Really small: a new mini robot with the purpose of helping clean up tiny plastic that pollutes water across the world.
The new microrobots, each of which is no bigger than the tip of a pencil, are magnetic(有磁性的)and shaped like four-pointed stars. When the sunlight shines on them, they can swim in a direction; when the sunlight disappears, they stop moving. Finding a piece of plastic, they hold onto it, produce chemical reactions and start to break it down.
The project is led by chemist Martin Pumera, a researcher who also studies ways to build microrobots at the Czech University of Chemistry and Technology in Prague. About ten years ago, he noticed the microplastic was everywhere, from the bottom of the ocean to the ice on the top of mountains. It even turned up in drinking water, both bottled and tap water. Just think about how much plastic you meet every day. It doesn’t easily degrade ( 降 解 ) which is a big problem. Therefore, Pumera chose to focus on the problem of water pollution caused by microplastic.
The researchers tested the microrobots on four types of plastic in the lab. After a week, all four began degrading, losing around 3 percent of their weight, which showed the microrobots were breaking the plastic down. The robots also turned the plastic’s smooth surface into the rough one. Finally, the scientists showed that magnets could attract the microrobots at the end of the test - along with the plastic waste.
In fact, Pumera says they still have a long way to go. These microrobots are unlikely to succeed in degrading all types of plastic. They’ll also need a lot of testing to show that they’re safe in open waterways, such as at sea. But he thinks that these challenges can be overcome. Someday, the microrobots will play a big role in a worldwide cleanup effort.
1. What can be learned about the new microrobot?| A．It is in the shape of a ball. | B．It is as small as a pencil. |
| C．It is driven by sunlight. | D．It uses physical reactions. |
| A．The microplastic pollution. | B．The ice on the mountains. |
| C．The need for drinking water. | D．The development of ocean resources. |
| A．Sorting it into four types. | B．Making its surface smooth. |
| C．Taking in it completely. | D．Breaking it down to some degree. |
| A．Doubtful. | B．Confident. | C．Regretful. | D．Uncertain. |
1. 倡议的目的；
2. 塑料污染的现状；
3. 减塑的方法。
字数：100字左右
Dear fellow students,
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Students’ Union
