At the Kyoto conference on global warming in December 1997, it became abundantly clear how complex it became to work out international agreements relating to environment because of economic concerns unique to each country. It is no longer enough to try to forbid certain activities or to reduce emissions of certain substances. The global challenges of the interlink between the environment and development increasingly bring us to the core of the economic life of states. During the late 1980s we were able, through international agreements, to make deep cuts in emissions harmful to the ozone layer. These reductions were made possible because substitution had been found for many of the harmful chemicals and, more important, because the harmful substances could be replaced without negative effects on employment and the economies of states. Although the threat of global warming has been known to the world for decades and all countries and leaders agree that we need to deal with the problem, we also know that the effects of measures, especially harsh measures taken in some countries, would be nullified(使无效)if other countries do not control their emissions. Whereas the UN team on climate change has found that the emissions of carbon dioxide would have to be cut globally by 60% to stabilize the content of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, this path is not feasible for several reasons. Such deep cuts would cause a breakdown of the world economy. Important and populous low or medium-income countries are not yet willing to undertake legal commitments about their energy uses. In addition, the state of world technology would not yet permit us to make such a big leap. We must, however, find a solution to the threat of global warming early in the 21st century. Such a commitment would require a degree of shared vision and common responsibilities new to humanity. Success lies in the force of imaginations, in imagining what would happen if we fail to act. Although many living in cold regions would welcome the global warming effect of a warmer summer, few would cheer the arrival of the subsequent tropic diseases, especially where there had been none.
单选题 In the passage the author implies that______.
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】解析:推理判断题。第一段第一、四句指出,在20世纪80年代末通过国际协议减少危害臭氧层的物质的排放是可以做到的。第一段第一句指出,1997年12月在京都召开的关于全球变暖的会议上,制定一个有关环境的国际协议显得尤为复杂;现在要想达成这样的协议却非易事,故选B)。A)中的always指“一直”,这与第一段的意思不符;C)与第二段第一句中“全球变暖的威胁在过去的几十年里已为人所知”相矛盾;D)与文意不符,通篇文章所述事实都说明全球变暖问题尚未解决。
单选题 The reason why it is difficult to get rid of the threat of global warming is that______.
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】解析:推理判断题。题干问的是难以摆脱全球变暖的原因。第二段第二句指出,要稳定大气层中二氧化碳含量,就要大幅度减少二氧化碳的排放量,但这是不切实际的。其中一个原因是并非所有的国家都愿意大幅度减少有害物质的排放,并为此承担义务。这就意味着有的国家采取措施,有的国家却不愿意采取,故选C)。A)与第二段第一句的意思相矛盾;B)与文意不符,虽然第二段最后一句指出,目前的技术现状还不允许做出如此大幅度地减少有害物质的排放量的行动,但并不是说永远无法解决;D)与文章最后一段意思不符。该段提到居住在寒冷地区的许多人对全球变暖带来的温暖夏日持欢迎态度,但很少有人会欢迎接踵而至的热带疾病。
单选题 According to the author, it is impossible at present to cut 60% of carbon dioxide emissions globally because______.
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】解析:事实细节题。由第二段第三句可知,大幅度减少二氧化碳排放不可行的三个原因之一就是会引起世界经济的崩溃,故选D)。A)在文中未提及;B)、C)不在所提出的三个原因之列。
单选题 What should all countries do to help solve the problem of global warming?
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】解析:推理判断题。题干问的是针对全球变暖,各个国家应该如何行动。由第二段第四句可知,某些人口众多的中低收入大国还不愿意为能源消耗承担法律上的义务,所以导致各国在这方面的行动不能达成一致,因此B)正确。A)与文意不符,第一段最后提到在20世纪80年代末,人们用替代品代替了许多有害物质,但并没有提到“完全替代”;C)、D)在文中均未提及。
单选题 The main purpose of this passage is to______.
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】解析:主旨大意题。纵观全文,文章涉及解决全球变暖问题的现状、遇到的困难、产生困难的原因以及人类应该采取的措施。由此可见,文章主要是对全球变暖这一问题进行分析,故选C)。