At the Kyoto conference on global warming in December 1997, it became abundantly clear how complex it has become to work out international agreements relating to the 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 substitutions 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(抵消)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 CO
2
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(人口众多的)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 21th century. Such a commitment would require a degree of shared vision and common responsibilities new to humanity. Success lies in the force of imagination, 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 tropical diseases, especially where there had been none.
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：文章第二段指出，对于全球变暖所造成的威胁，各国领导人已经注意到并同意我们应该解决这个问题。所以A项不对。第二段中也提到了“Important and populous low—or medium—income countries are not yet willing to undertake legal commit—merits about their energy uses．”这句话也就意味着不是所有国家的人们都愿意大幅度削减有害物质的排放。所以C项正确。文中说的是以世界目前的技术水平还不容许我们做如此大幅度的削减，并不能由此推断不能解决这个问题。所以B项也不对。D项只是说寒冷地区的一些人对全球变暖导致的更加暖和的夏季的态度，但不是很难消除全球变暖威胁的原因。因此本题的正确答案为C。
单选题
In the passage the author implies that______.
【正确答案】
B
【答案解析】解析：文章开头第一句话就讲到，由于各个国家独特的经济因素，要制定出与环境有关的国际协议已经变得相当复杂。可见B项正确，各国间不容易达成与环境有关的国际协议。第一段中还讲到“During the late 1980s we ware able，through international agreements，to make deep cuts in emissions harmful to the ozone layer．”20世纪80年代后期，通过国际协议，我们能够大幅度削减对臭氧层有害的物质排放。可见A项不对。第二段讲到，尽管世人了解全球变暖的威胁已有几十年……显然C项也不对。第三段讲到，在21世纪早期，我们必须找到解决全球变暖威胁的办法。可见D项也不对，全球变暖的问题大部分并没有得到解决。因此本题的正确答案为B。
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：文章第二段第二句话讲到“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 CO
2
in the atmosphere，this path is not feasible for several reasons．Such deep cuts would cause a breakdown of the world economy．”虽然联合国气候变化研究小组发现：要想稳定大气中二氧化碳的含量，全球二氧化碳的排放量将不得不减少60％，但是，好几个理由显示这种做法不是切实可行的。如此大幅度的削减会引起世界经济的崩溃。可见D项最符合文章的意思，所以应该选D。
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：本题答案在第三段： “We must，however，find a solution to the threat of global warming early in the 21th century．Such a commitment would require a degree of shared vision and common responsibilities new to humanity．”在21世纪早期，我们必须找到解决全球变暖威胁的办法；这样的义务要求人们达成一定程度的共识，要求人们共同承担人类的新责任。可见，要解决全球变暖问题需要人们共同承担人类的新责任。B项“它们应该自愿承担它们利用能源的法律责任”与文章的意思相符。所以应该选B。