1 . Throwing away unwanted food has become a big issue in the world. While some of us throw away unwanted items, people in other parts of the world face food shortages and are starving. It’s a shocking fact that a third of the world’s food is wasted each year, which is enough to feed a billion hungry people.
You may think supermarkets are the main contributors to this mountain of food. After all, they do desert stuff that is past its sell-by-date and they often refuse to sell fruits or vegetables that are in the wrong shape or look damaged. They’ve also been criticized for encouraging customers to buy more than they need through promotions such as “buy one and get one free”.
But the biggest culprit for creating food waste is us human beings. In Europe, an incredible 53% of food waste comes from households, which results in 88 million tons of food waste a year. So instead of filling our bellies, our food is filling up landfill sites.
In Denmark, a woman called Selina Juul has been working hard to solve this problem. She moved from Russia many years ago and was amazed to see the abundance of food available in the supermarkets. But despite so much availability, she found that people were buying more than they needed and throwing too much away.
She convinced some supermarkets to stop selling their items in bulk (大量) so that people bought only what they needed. She produced a leftover cookbook and set up an education program in schools, which has helped create a significant 25% reduction in food waste.
Clearly, we need to think twice when we buy something in supermarkets or online, and when we’re at home we should make the most of the food we have — using recipes that use up our leftovers or even sharing our remaining food with our friends and neighbors.
1. Why are supermarkets to blame for food waste?| A．They store spare items. | B．They damage bad stuff. |
| C．They display new arrivals. | D．They hold sales promotion. |
| A．Benefit. | B．Demand. |
| C．Cause. | D．Challenge. |
| A．She contributed to reducing food waste. | B．She made an extraordinary discovery. |
| C．She was a pioneer in cooking leftovers. | D．She focused on the availability of food. |
| A．Start sharing extra food. | B．Switch to online shopping. |
| C．Increase the varieties of food. | D．Improve our cooking methods. |
2 . For many parents, raising a teenager is like fighting a long war, but years go by without any clear winner. Like a border conflict between neighboring countries, the parent-teen war is about boundaries: Where is the line between what I control and what you do?
Both sides want peace, but neither feels it has any power to stop the conflict. In part, this is because neither is willing to admit any responsibility for starting it. From the parents’ point of view, the only cause of their fight is their adolescents’ complete unreasonableness. And of course, the teens see it in exactly the same way, except oppositely. Both feel trapped.
In this article, I’ll describe three no-win situations that commonly arise between teens and parents and then suggest some ways out of the trap. The first no-win situation is quarrels over unimportant things. Examples include the color of the teen’s hair, the cleanliness of the bedroom, the preferred style of clothing, the child’s failure to eat a good breakfast before school, or his tendency to sleep until noon on the weekends. Second, blaming. The goal of a blaming battle is to make the other admit that his bad attitude is the reason why everything goes wrong. Third, needing to be right. It doesn’t matter what the topic is—politics, the laws of physics, or the proper way to break an egg—the point of these arguments is to prove that you are right and the other person is wrong, for both wish to be considered an authority—someone who actually knows something—and therefore to command respect. Unfortunately, as long as parents and teens continue to assume that they know more than the other, they’ll continue to fight these battles forever and never make any real progress.
1. Why does the author compare the parent-teen war to a border conflict?| A．Both are about where to draw the line. |
| B．Both can continue for generations. |
| C．Neither has any clear winner. |
| D．Neither can be put to an end. |
| A．The teens tend to have a full understanding of their parents. |
| B．The teens agree with their parents on the cause of the conflict. |
| C．The teens cause their parents of misleading them. |
| D．The teens blame their parents for starting the conflict. |
| A．give orders to the other |
| B．know more than the other |
| C．gain respect from the other |
| D．get the other to behave properly |
| A．Solutions for the parent-teen problems. |
| B．Examples of the parent-teen war. |
| C．Causes for the parent-teen conflicts. |
| D．Future of the parent-teen relationship. |
3 . Clothing rental is a hot new industry and retailers (零售商) are demanding to get on board in hopes of attracting green shopper.
But is renting fashion actually more environmentally-friendly than buying it, and if so, how much more? Journalist and author Elizabeth Cline investigated (调查) this question and concluded that it's not as sustainable as it seems.
Take shipping, for example, which has to go two ways if an item is rented — receiving and returning. Cline writes that consumer transportation has the second largest carbon footprint of our collective fashion habit after manufacturing.
She writes, ''An item ordered online and then returned can send out 20 kilograms of carbon each way, and increases up to 50 kilograms for rush shipping. By comparison, the carbon impact of a pair of jeans purchased from a physical store and washed and worn at home is 33.4 kilograms, according to a 2015 study by Levi's.''
Then there's the burden of washing, which has to happen for every item when it's returned, regardless of whether or not it was worn. For most rental services, this usually means dry cleaning, a high impact and polluting process. All the rental services that Cline looked into have replaced perchloroethylene (氯乙烯), a carcinogenic (致癌的) air pollutant, still used by 70 percent of US dry cleaners, with alternatives, although these aren't great either.
Lastly, Cline fears that rental services will increase our appetite for fast fashion, simply because it's so easily accessible. There's something called ''share washing'' that makes people waste more precisely because a product or service is shared and thus is regarded as more eco-friendly. Uber is one example of this, advertised as ''a way to share rides and limit ear ownership.'' and yet ''it has been proven to discourage walking,bicycling, and public transportation use.''
Renting clothes is still preferable to buying them cheap and throwing them in the dustbin after a few wears, but we shouldn't let the availability of these services make us too satisfied. There's an even better step — that's wearing what is already in the closet.
1. What is Elizabeth Cline's attitude toward clothing rental?| A．Approving. | B．Unfavorable. |
| C．Objective. | D．Enthusiastic. |
| A．rental services are on the rise |
| B．clothing rental will be as successful as Uber |
| C．renting clothes might waste more than expected |
| D．renting clothes might make people lose interest in fast fashion |
| A．give up renting any clothing |
| B．purchase inexpensive clothes |
| C．rent clothes rather than buy them |
| D．make full use of clothes we've possessed |
| A．Clothing rental is a new fashion. |
| B．Clothing rental is retailers' preference. |
| C．Renting clothes is not that eco-friendly. |
| D．Renting-clothes business is in a dilemma. |
