1 . The first-ever fine for space junk was issued in early October in a case of off-planet environmental enforcement (执法). The television company, Dish Network, was hit with a $125,000 fine by the United States government for failing to remove a satellite in orbit that would have risked a collision (撞击) with other space equipment, a safety concern that will only grow with time as off-planet activities increase.
According to NASA, debris (碎片) orbiting in space can travel up to 15 kilometres per second, which is nearly 10 times faster than the velocity (速度) of a bullet. A huge amount of damage can be caused by something just a few centimetres in size, meaning that every effort must be taken to keep space as clear as possible. Collisions that take place in space have an effect back on Earth. Damaged satellites impact our ability to use the Internet and navigation (导航), leaving increasingly global critical infrastructure in an unstable state.
One solution for this may be to send autonomous space vehicles into orbit, which can then catch and effectively de-orbit space junk. By utilizing tools such as robotic arms, or nets, this approach will require very precise track and fine cooperation in order to be successful. Such measures are yet to catch up with the increase in space activity and pollution currently occurring. Therefore, fines and regulatory enforcement may presently be the only realistic method to hold organizations accountable.
The Dish Network satellite, fined $125,000 by the Federal Communications Commission, failed to de-orbit as a lack of fuel stopped the satellite from fully decommissioning (退役) a safe distance from Earth, falling short by around 75 miles (120 kilometres). It is hoped that significant fines like these will serve as a warning for companies, forcing them to make sure the safe decommissioning of their space operations.
1. Why was Dish Network fined?| A．It left space junk in orbit. | B．It increased off-planet activities. |
| C．It made collisions among space equipment. | D．It sent too much space equipment to space. |
| A．Space junk may turn into bullets. | B．Debris fragments are too tiny to track. |
| C．Debris may cause great damage in space. | D．A bad space environment will destroy the Earth. |
| A．The harm of space junk. | B．Ways to remove space junk. |
| C．Types of autonomous space vehicles. | D．Approaches to stopping satellites. |
| A．Unconcerned. | B．Doubtful. | C．Negative. | D．Approving. |
2 . The recent reports of a 4-year-old girl on a Shanghai beach have gone viral on social media platforms, provoking debate about whether China should criminalize negligence in child supervision.
The father of the little girl claimed that he left her alone on the beach for about 12 minutes to fetch his phone. However, she was nowhere to be found when he was back. Surveillance (监控) videos show that she waited for about 10 minutes before walking toward the water’s edge alone, and then disappeared into the water. Two weeks later, her body was discovered about 100 kilometers away in neighboring Zhejiang Province.
The core issue in this case is the father’s leaving his young daughter unattended on the beach, causing her tragic death. Should such behavior, when it causes harm to a child, be seen as a criminal act? In an online survey, more than 90 percent of respondents insisted that the father be held legally responsible and face criminal punishments.
Nevertheless, according to Liu Chunquan, a lawyer, it may not satisfy the criteria for criminal negligence, since the primary focus of Chinese criminal law is on extreme cases of parental neglect, such as physical abuse and mental torture. Rarely do legal authorities charge parents; instead, they are just likely to face penalties consisting of warnings and fines.
In 2022, a 2-year-old baby drowned in a cesspool while in the company of his father. The court ruled shared responsibility between the father and the cesspool’s owner, with a 7:3 proportion. The owner was ordered to pay 20,000 yuan to the child’s family. Unluckily, similar cases do exist nationwide. Roughly, 100,000 children lose their lives in accidents annually in China, which is largely due to negligence, such as parents leaving their children unattended, either in locked cars or at home. Besides, drowning is now the main cause of death for children aged 1 to 14 years old.
It is no wonder that an increasing number of netizens request that specific laws and regulations be passed to ensure the safety of children and their well-being. Hopefully, criminalizing child supervision negligence in China can serve as a warning and precaution.
However, downsides of introducing such legislation may also emerge. For instance, it’s difficult to distinguish between a regrettable accident and criminal negligence, so that over-criminalization can be triggered, in which well-meaning parents making honest mistakes are charged with a crime.
Therefore, a more balanced approach to addressing the issue of infant safety should involve a combination of new legislation, education and support services. The ultimate objective is to prevent similar catastrophes in the future. We must recognize that children are not only their parents’ offspring, but also the nation’s future.
1. What can we infer from the tragedy of the 4-year-old girl?| A．Her father’s carelessness and negligence should be to blame. |
| B．The beach in Shanghai should not be open to small children. |
| C．Her father has been sentenced to severe penalties by the police. |
| D．She would have survived if she had not waited in the water for a long time. |
| A．Irresponsible adults contribute to children’s death. | B．People can’t be too concerned about child safety. |
| C．Kids shouldn’t be allowed to swim alone. | D．Parents’ constant monitoring is a must. |
| A．the mild penalties in the existing laws | B．parents’ ignorance of potential dangers |
| C．frequent occurrence of such incidents | D．masses of netizens’ urgent appeals |
| A．Indifferent. | B．Negative. | C．Objective. | D．Supportive. |
3 . The Yurok people have lived along the Klamath River, which flows from the Cascades in Oregon southwest through Northern California, for thousands of years, protecting the region and river from which they — and others — draw sustenance (生计).
But as development and pollution continue to reduce the number of fish in the river and the quantity and quality of its waters, the Yurok Tribe is legalizing (合法化) the tribe’s longstanding care by granting the Rights of Personhood to the Klamath, the first river in North America to have such rights declared.
The Yurok Tribal Council’s May 2019 resolution means the river has the same legal rights as a human under tribal law. This order allows people to bring law cases on behalf of the river when its rights are violated. According to the resolution, the tribe’s intention is to provide a legal basis for safeguarding the river and its ecosystem, especially in the face of water diversion, industrial pollution, and climate change impacts, among other threats. In a testimony (证词) delivered to the U. S. House of Representatives in October 2019, Yurok Tribe Vice Chairman Frankie Myers said this legal framework could create a path to ward a more thoughtful view of the rights of nature in other communities and courts, and that any money awarded by the Yurok courts will fund cleanup and restoration projects to remedy the litigated harms.
The Yurok Tribe’s resolution draws lessons from the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and echoes the efforts of other Indigenous tribes, including the White Earth Band of Ojibwe, which adopted the Rights of wild rice, in December 2018. “This is a very important step forward in the Rights of Nature movement,” Mari Margil, Associate Director of the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund commented.
1. Which of the following can be used to describe Yurok people?| A．A conqueror. | B．A guardian. | C．A governor. | D．A consumer. |
| A．The process of legalization. | B．The tradition of Yurok tribe. |
| C．The reason behind the legalization. | D．The importance of the Klamath River. |
| A．Win an award in cleanup projects. |
| B．Protect the personhood of the river. |
| C．Fight against global water pollution. |
| D．Improve the government legal system. |
| A．Time and tide wait for no man. |
| B．Birds of a feather flock together. |
| C．Past experience is a guide for the future. |
| D．All things are difficult before they are easy. |
4 . The Food and Drug Administration (F. D. A.) announced a new proposal on Wednesday that would change the criteria for which packaged foods the agency considers “healthy”, in an attempt to modernize its approach to nutrition and reduce the burden of diet-related diseases.
Currently, about 5 percent of all packaged foods are labeled “healthy”, according to the agency. The definition, which was set in 1994, allows for food manufacturers to add the word “healthy” to their products, as long as the products have limited amounts of total fat, saturated (饱和的) fat, cholesterol and sodium (钠) and provide at least 10 percent of the daily value of one or more of the following nutrients: vitamin A, vitamin C, calcium, iron, protein or dietary fiber. (Seafood, game meat and raw fruits and vegetables have slightly different criteria.) In 2021, the F. D. A. updated its guidelines to allow for some foods to contain more total fat and to include some that provide at least 10 percent of the daily value of vitamin D. Importantly, there is currently no limit on added sugars under the current definition- an omission that the F. D. A. believes is inconsistent with today’s nutrition science.
“The old rule was really outdated— you could create any kind of Frankenstein food that met the nutrient criteria and label it as healthy,” said Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, a professor of nutrition in Boston. “This is a major advance.”
The proposed rule, which the agency announced to coincide with Wednesday’s White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition and Health, introduces a new limit on added sugars-in general, no more than 2.5 grams per serving, although this can vary depending on the food.
The new definition aims to encourage healthy eating by prioritizing a mix of vegetables, fruits, grains, dairy, proteins and certain oils, including vegetable oils. A “healthy” food would need to contain a minimum amount of at least one of those food groups and be under the proposed limits for saturated fats and added sugars. Raw whole fruits and vegetables would automatically qualify. Many sugary cereals (谷物), highly sweetened yogurts and white breads, which might currently qualify as “healthy” under the existing definition, would be removed under the new rule．
1. What can we know about the old rule?| A．It was set in 1994. |
| B．It can guarantee people’s health. |
| C．It has strict limit on added sugar. |
| D．It was consistent with today’s nutrition science. |
| A．Negative. | B．Doubtful. | C．Uncaring. | D．Supportive. |
| A．Seafood. |
| B．Highly sweetened yogurts. |
| C．Raw whole fruits and vegetables. |
| D．Food containing large amounts of total fat. |
| A．A diary. | B．A textbook. | C．A newspaper. | D．A science fiction. |
5 . My generation — people born after 1990 — are accustomed to “all-in-platform” life, where we use mobile apps of different platforms to do almost everything in life.
For instance, I ordered a cup of coffee on Monday using an online delivery app. Then, I called a taxi by tapping on the app of a ride-booking service. Next, I bought some necessities on shopping platform Taobao. That done, I moved on to various other online destinations to get my daily fix of music, reading, social networking and so forth.
Platforms now play an increasingly important role in almost all aspects of day-to-day life, not just in economic and political processes. Consumption and social interaction are closely linked to platforms now.
But, I began to get confused recently. I thought I was being treated differently. My friend and I called a taxi at the same time on a ride-hailing platform (打车平台) and found that for the same destination, the prices were different. The price indicated on my phone was higher. One of the potential reasons could have been that I regularly use the ride-hailing platform and have a higher ranking while my friend doesn’t use it that often. So, the ride-hailing platform offers discounts to newbies like her, to attract and have such customers.
China’s latest efforts in regulating monopolistic or improper market behavior are of great significance in protecting consumers’ lawful rights.
“The essence of platform-based monopoly (垄断) is that a large number of users are gathered on only a select few platform companies, leading to uneven data gathering different platforms. But in China some platforms use their own data and traffic (流量) to expand capital in a disorderly way,” said Wang Yong, deputy director of the Institute of Economics at Tinghua University.
Data monopoly also brought another inconvenience for comumers — platforms block links to each other. For instance, link to WeChat Pay of Tencent is not available on Alibuba’s Taobao while there is no Alipay link on JD app’s payment options.
Last year, Meituan was charged with preventing customers from using Alipay as a payment option on Meituan apps and platforms.
In July, the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology launched a six-month special rectification (专项治理) for the internet industry, asking platform operators to stop blocking each other’s link.
“More efforts should also be made to strike a good balance between personal information protection and interconnectivity between platforms Companies are being encouraged to further develop data encryption (加密) technology so that the data are available but not visible.”
1. What is the author’s purpose in writing Para.2?| A．To offer some tips on using apps on mobile phone. |
| B．To share his experience with mobile apps. |
| C．To further explain what is “all-in-platform” life. |
| D．To help readers familiarize themselves with mobile apps. |
| A．The author encountered so called “big data price discrimination”. |
| B．The author and his friend were treated differently by taxi drivers. |
| C．Due to the author's higher ranking, the platform offered him a cheaper price. |
| D．The ride-hailing platform offers discounts to regular customers. |
| A．to gather personal information |
| B．to expand capital |
| C．to protect consumers' rights |
| D．to use their data and traffic wisely |
| A．Sympathetic. | B．Approving. |
| C．Critical. | D．Grateful. |
| A．Data monopolies and the inconvenience they bring to mobile app life. |
| B．Mobile apps have greatly changed our lives. |
| C．How to protect personal information on mobile apps. |
| D．Platforms have impacted every aspect of our daily lives. |
6 . We’ve all been there, trying our best to do our bit to help save the planet, when a really essential item that you had to order online arrives in such an unbelievable amount of packaging that it makes you feel like it’s an unprepared game of passing the parcel.
It’s made even worse by the fact that some of the packaging can’t be recycled. In fact, 10 million tonnes of packaging waste are produced in the UK every year. A lot of this ends up in landfill, two-thirds of which could have instead been recovered.
The good news, however, is that how packaging waste is managed is in for a BIG shake-up in line with the “polluter pays principle”. By placing the main point of duty to pay on brand owners, they will be encouraged to choose more sustainable packaging options which are recyclable and reusable as much as possible. Otherwise, they will have to pay higher fees.
This is a system known as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) — meaning that those who have control over packaging design decisions will be encouraged to do the right thing for the planet at the beginning and consider what happens at the end of the packaging’s life from the start.
What this means is that instead of local authorities picking up the bill for household waste management, companies will have instead to pay for managing your household packaging waste as well as the form businesses, and they will be met with the associated little costs too.
And, as an added bonus, the new EPR laws on packaging will also mean that producers are required to put clear mandatory (强制性的) labelling on packaging, for example, this could be “RECYCLE” or “DO NOT RECYCLE”. Of course, we hope that the “DO NOT RECYCLE” category labelling is the minority. It is aimed that by 2030, 78% of packaging will be recycled in the UK.
1. What can we know from the first two paragraphs?| A．Two-thirds of packaging waste is recycled. |
| B．Over-packaging is often the case in life. |
| C．The quality of goods cannot be guaranteed. |
| D．Online shopping is getting less popular. |
| A．Designers. | B．Producers. | C．Customers. | D．Local authorities. |
| A．Pay higher taxes and recycle the packaging waste. |
| B．Put clear labelling on packaging and promote sales. |
| C．Cut packaging waste and improve packaging recycling. |
| D．Follow the packaging design trend and to right things. |
| A．Their labelling on packaging will be simple and generous. |
| B．The majority of their packaging needn’t be recycled. |
| C．They will be of high quality and inexpensive. |
| D．They’ll arrive in the right amount of recyclable packaging. |
7 . New Zealand has announced it will outlaw smoking for the next generation, so that those who are aged 14 and under today will never be legally able to buy tobacco.
New legislation (法规) means the legal smoking age will increase every year, to create a smoke-free generation of New Zealanders, associate Health Minister Dr Ayesha Verrall said on Thursday. “This is a historic day for the health of our people,” she said.
The government announced the rising age alongside other measures to make smoking unaffordable and inaccessible, to try to reach its goal of making the country entirely smoke-free within the next four years. Other measures include reducing the legal amount of nicotine in tobacco products to very low levels, cutting down the shops where cigarettes could legally be sold, and increasing funding to addiction services. The new laws will not restrict vape (电子烟) sales.
New Zealand's daily smoking rates have been dropping over time - down to 11.65% in 2018, from 18% a decade earlier. But smoking rates for Maori and Pacifika were far higher - 29% for Maori and 18% for Pasifika. “If nothing changes, it would be decades till Maori smoking rates fall below 5%,” Verrall said. She said to end smoking in the next four years was within reach: “I believe it is. The issue is, though, if we don't change what we’re doing, we won’t make it for Maori - and that’s what the plan is really focused on”.
Smoking has already been widely replaced by vaping among teenage New Zealanders, which is also attracting many young people who would never have taken up smoking - according to surveying of 19,000 high school students this year, nearly 20% were vaping daily or several times a day, the majority with high nicotine doses. That’s compared to 3% of those aged 15-17 who smoked daily in 2018, or 13% who smoked a decade earlier.
Verrall said the legislation would be introduced in 2022, with the age limits coming in in 2023.
1. What’s the final goal of the new legislation?| A．To forbid the people aged 14 and under to buy tobacco. |
| B．To make the country entirely smoke-free within years. |
| C．To make buying tobacco hard. |
| D．To increase the legal smoking age. |
| A．Everyone is allowed to purchase tobacco with permit. |
| B．Purchase of smoking becomes easier and less pricy. |
| C．The vape sales will be greatly influenced. |
| D．It benefits the building of a smoke-free generation. |
| A．New Zealand’s daily smoking rate is quite low. |
| B．It has taken a long time to decrease the rate of smoking. |
| C．Smoking rates are not equal among different parts in New Zealand. |
| D．The smoking rate will be higher over the years. |
| A．A Historic Day of Smoking |
| B．Decreasing Smoking Rate of New Zealand |
| C．Vape-replacement of Tobacco |
| D．New Zealand to Ban Smoking for Next Generation |
8 . Known as a “living fossil”, the Chinese sturgeon(中华鲟)is a very precious species. It is believed to have lived alongside the dinosaurs more than 140 million years ago. Although dinosaurs are long since gone, the Chinese sturgeon still exists. However, the species has been listed as ‘‘Critically Endangered’’ on the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Red List of Threatened Species．
On May 14,Shanghai legislators(立法机构)passed a new law protecting the Chinese sturgeon, emphasizing “regional cooperation”, according to China Daily. “This is the first local legislation in the country to protect one endangered fish,” said Ding Wei, director of the legislative affairs committee of the Shanghai Municipal People’s Congress.
Taken effect on June 6, the regulation urges cooperation in law enforcement(实施), scientific research and rescue of the species between Shanghai and other provinces and regions in the Yangtze River basin, according to People’s Daily．
The need for collaborative efforts is due to the living habitat of the Chinese sturgeon. As an anadromous(溯河产卵的)species, it mainly lives in the Yangtze River and depends on the Vangtze estuary(河口)for migration.
The protection of the Chinese sturgeon is urgent. China began the artificial breeding and release of the fish in 1984. However, very few of the fanned fish have survived in the wild, the number of which is less than 1000, according to a report by the Shanghai Observer.
Whether this species can be preserved depends on the natural population. “If the natural population is not well protected, the Chinese sturgeon is in danger of extinction.” Li Furong, vice chairperson of the Agricultural and Rural Affairs Committee of Shanghai Municipal People’s Congress, said in the report.
Since Jan 1 of this year, a 10-year fishing ban on key areas of the Yangtze River basin has been issued, covering 332 nature reserves, which includes Shanghai’s Chinese sturgeon nature reserve．
1. What is the new law passed on May 14 in Shanghai about?| A．Forbidding fishing in the area. |
| B．Protecting the Chinese sturgeon. |
| C．Increasing the reproduction of the Chinese sturgeon. |
| D．Listing the Chinese sturgeon as an endangered species. |
| A．It mainly lives in the waters of Shanghai. |
| B．Artificial breeding technology costs too much. |
| C．Farmed fish multiplies quickly. |
| D．Saving the species depends on protecting their natural population. |
| A．immediate | B．joint | C．urgent | D．further |
| A．The Chinese Sturgeon: Living Fossil |
| B．Artificial Breeding: Future of the Chinese Sturgeon |
| C．A New Law for a Fish |
| D．Call for Conservation of the Chinese Sturgeon |
9 . In the USA, youth curfews (宵禁) are traditionally issued by a parent in the interest of safety. This type of curfew is personal, and rightfully so. However, to stop teenagers committing crimes, some officials have turned youth curfews from family decisions into public laws.
The idea may have been thought to have good intentions. In practice, however, these policies have been shown to be unfair and unconstitutional, according to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). In the town of Sumner, Washington, a father allowed his fourteen-year-old son to go to a convenience store after 11:00 p.m. Sumner had adopted a curfew law that prohibited people under the age of eighteen from being in public places past that hour. The father was fined, and then he pursued a legal challenge against the town. The ACLU, which filed the case on behalf of the father, claimed the curfew laws had violated (侵犯) parents' rights. In the end, Sumner's curfew laws were struck down.
But isn't it irresponsible not to enforce a curfew on teenagers? Curfew laws supporters argue that officials should provide a curfew to ensure teens are home by a reasonable hour. The risk of a serious accident is three times as high for drivers aged sixteen to nineteen as for drivers over twenty. And dangers only increase at night. This indicates to some that a law keeping teens off the road late at night is a positive safety measure. Still, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) says that the best ways for drivers to increase safety are by obeying the speed limit, wearing a seat belt, and paying attention. The NHTSA makes no mention of youth curfews making driving safer.
In cities, curfew enforcement has been ineffective or even had a negative impact on communities. Most crimes committed by teens actually happen around 3：00 p.m. , right after school. On non-school days, that time shifts to between 7:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. The curfew hours, usually between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. , occur at a time of day when teenage crime is at its lowest. Meanwhile, violent crime rates peak around 10:00 p.m. for adults. When law enforcement performs the teen curfew sweep, policemen are distracted from the more serious violent crimes being committed by adults at that time. Also troubling is the racial discrimination in cities with curfews. For example, recent data have found that in Minneapolis, Minnesota, 56% of youths charged with breaking curfews were African American. Other law enforcement department reports show similar problems. Curfew laws are criticized because they are enforced in a racially discriminatory way.
The ACLU has succeeded in striking down at least one curfew law because of concerns over parental rights. Along with other community and civil rights groups, it continues to pursue other cases, arguing that curfew law enforcement can only increase tension and crime. To arrest teens for driving home from the movies, playing basketball in the park, or simply walking their dog is to punish them for being outside their homes—a policy inconsistent with the individual rights established in the U. S. Constitution.
1. What is the authors attitude towards legal curfews for teenagers?| A．Disapproving. | B．Supportive. |
| C．Uncertain. | D．Indifferent. |
| A．Reasonable curfew hours for teenagers. |
| B．The necessity of enforcing youth curfews. |
| C．Unwanted consequences of youth curfews. |
| D．The impact of youth curfews on adult crimes. |
| A．It helps people defend their individual rights. |
| B．It is in favour of enforcing a curfew on teenagers. |
| C．It stresses the responsibilities of parents to their children. |
| D．It believes youth curfews are highly related to road safety. |
| A．teenagers in the United States love their independence |
| B．enforcing youth curfews will lead to distrust of the policemen |
| C．legal curfews should exist only when parents are irresponsible |
| D．legal curfews violate individual liberties and may be cancelled |
Do you know the UK government has
The motivation behind this
A similar law
As of January 2015, 22% of adult men and 17% of adult women smoke in Great Britain. The possibility of smoking in the UK increases with age so that by 15 years of age 8% of school children
Smoking is one of
