阅读理解 When I was still an architecture student, a teacher told me, "We learn more from buildings that fall down than from buildings that stand up." What he meant was that construction is as much the result of experience as of theory. Although structural design follows established formulas, the actual performance of a building is complicated by the passage of time, the behavior of users, the natural elements—and unnatural events. All are difficult to simulate. Buildings, unlike cars, can''t be crash-tasted. The first important lesson of the World Trade Center collapse is that tall buildings can withstand the impact of a large jetliner. The twin towers were supported by 59 perimeter columns on each side. Although about 30 of these columns, extending from four to six floors, were destroyed in each building by the impact, initially both towers remained standing. Even so, the death toll (代价) was appalling—2,235 people lost their lives. I was once asked, how tall buildings should be designed given what we''d learned from the World Trade Center collapse. My answer was, "Lower". The question of when a tall building becomes unsafe is easy to answer. Common aerial fire-fighting ladders in use today are 100 feet high and can reach to about the 10th floor, so fires in buildings up to 10 stories high can be fought from the exterior (外部). Fighting fires and evacuating occupants above that height depend on fire stairs. The taller the building, the longer it will take for firefighters to climb to the scene of the fire. So the simple answer to the safety question is "Lower than 10 stories." Then why don''t cities impose lower height limits? A 60-story office building does not have six times as much rentable space as a 10-story building. However, all things being equal, such a building will produce four times more revenue and four times more in property taxes. So cutting building heights would mean cutting city budgets. The most important lesson of the World Trade Center collapse is not that we should stop building tall buildings but that we have misjudged their cost. We did the same thing when we underestimated the cost of hurtling along a highway in a steel box at 70 miles per hour. It took many years before seat belts, air bags, radial tires, and antilock brakes became commonplace. At first, cars simply were too slow to warrant concern. Later, manufacturers resisted these expensive devices, arguing that consumers would not pay for safety. Now we do willingly.
单选题 The first paragraph tells us that_____.
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】文章第一段第二句作者解释说,老师的意思是建筑是经验的结果,同样也是理论的结果。
单选题 What can we learn from the WTC collapse?
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】文章第二段说,世贸大楼倒塌的经验教训是,建筑物经受住了飞机撞击的考验,撞击后没有立即倒塌,即赢得了一些时间使楼里的人可以撤离。但即使如此,死亡人数也还是令人震惊的。
单选题 Ideally, the policy in city construction should be_____.
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】文章第三段解释了十层以上建筑物给救火工作带来的困难,故建筑物在十层以下最好。
单选题 Why are there still high buildings, or even skyscrapers in many cities?
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】文章第四段解释说,一座六十层办公楼的收入和财产税是一座十层楼(占地面积相同)的四倍,所以削减楼层的高度,等于削减城市的财政预算。
单选题 What is the most important lesson of the WTC collapse?
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】文章最后一段说,世贸大楼倒塌的最重要教训不是说我们不应该盖高层建筑,而是说我们错误估计了其成本。为了解释其含义,作者用汽车安全措施的使用历史为例,说明人“吃一堑,长一智”的道理。