九、能源与环保
TEXT 79
As arguments about climate change heat up，don't underestimate your opponent.Looking at a nationally representative survey of views on stem cell research，the Big Bang，human evolution，nanotechnology，genetically modified food and climate change，researchers at Carnegie Mellon University found that respondents with the most education and the highest scores on scientific literacy tests had the most polarized beliefs.Their observation is published yesterday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
On climate change，the researchers found that political identity was a more important signal of where respondents stood than their academic acumen or scientific sophistication.“Conservatives with higher scores display less concern about climate change，while liberals with higher scores display more concern，”the authors wrote.“These patterns suggest that scientific knowledge may facilitate defending positions motivated by nonscientific concerns.”
This is a manifestation of what researchers call motivated reasoning：a phenomenon where people evaluate facts and figures with a goal in mind，often signaling allegiance to a political group.For climate change，that means people who most fervently call for action to lower greenhouse gas emissions and those who think rising average temperatures are scarcely a problem can draw on the same body of evidence to support their views.
It also means that waving scientific studies and researchers’ findings at opponents is unlikely to change minds in a debate，and may in fact make people further cement their opinions.“What you believe about climate change is more an indicator of which side you're on，”said Dan Kahan，a professor of law and psychology at Yale Law School who was not involved in the study.Having a certain opinion on climate change signals solidarity with political compatriots，regardless of someone's familiarity with the scientific method.“It's not a measure of what they know；it's a measure of who they are，”Kahan said.
To bridge the divide on climate change，he explained，disentangling the issue from its political trappings and focusing on tangible economic concerns—like dealing with sea-level rise—would give public officials a means to tackle the issue without jeopardizing their bona fides among their constituents.Kahan said the new findings affirm a growing body of work on how people come to their views on climate change.“It's comforting to know that previous findings on the culturally polarizing impact of greater science comprehension can be replicated，”he said，adding that the findings are particularly reassuring in an era when many findings in social sciences are facing intense scrutiny over replicability.
1.Concerning climate change，those who know more about science____.
[A] tend to brag about their expertise
[B] are further apart on their views
[C] are often chosen as respondents
[D] often argue with the most educated
2.The attitude on climate change is really determined by____.
[A] the degree of scientific literacy
[B] the insightfulness of scientists
[C] the political position
[D] the nonscientific knowledge
3.“Motivated reasoning”（Para.3）is a process by which____.
[A] conclusion is reached with bias
[B] facts and beliefs are confused
[C] scarce evidence is found for a view
[D] an action is politically motivated
4.Dan Kahan has the opinion that____.
[A] the researchers’ findings need to be confirmed
[B] climate change has nothing to do with science
[C] scientists are more likely to debate on climate change
[D] science is often distorted by political affiliation
5.To reduce the polarization of views on climate change，Kahan suggests____.
[A] finding more evidence to confirm previous findings
[B] separating political position from scientific views
[C] re-educating public officials with the latest knowledge
[D] scrutinizing previous findings with more rigor
考研必备词汇
其他词汇
1.Big Bang 大爆炸理论
2.nanotechnology 纳米技术
3.proceedings 学报，会议录
4.compatriot 同国人，同胞
5.trapping 符号，象征
6.bona fide诚意，真诚
疑难长句注解
1.Looking at a nationally representative...polarized beliefs.（第一段）
本句由现在分词短语Looking at...climate change和主句组成。在分词短语中，nationally representative survey是说这项调查的抽样在全国有代表性；在主句中，polarized beliefs是说这些人的观点呈两极分布，即观点严重对立。
2.On climate change，the researchers...sophistication.（第二段）
本句中，political identity指在政治上站在哪一边，是保守派（conservatives）一边，还是自由派（liberals）一边，一般来讲，在美国共和党人属于保守派，民主党人属于自由派。从句where respondents stood和本段的positions意思相近，都指一个人站在政治上的哪一边，即第四段也提到的which side you're on。词组scientific sophistication指科学上的专业知识或专业修养。
3.To bridge the divide...among their constituents.（第五段）
这个句子的主语是to bridge...rise这个不定式短语，句意为“这样做能给政府官员……”。在主语部分，disentangling和focusing这两个分词短语对bridge the divide做出进一步解释，其中divide指意见分歧；trappings此处意为“象征，标志”。句中，bona fides是外来语，这里是名词，意为“诚意，忠诚”；constituents指某个选区的“选民”；public officials指选民选出的政府官员，政府官员要对选民bona fide，代表选民的利益。
4.It's comforting to know that...replicability.（第五段）
本句包括一个直接引语和一个间接引语。在直接引语中，culturally polarizing impact指更多的科学知识对文化上的分歧的影响，即被调查者对科学了解越多，他们之间有关文化问题的分歧就越严重。在间接引语中，reassuring的意思跟comforting差不多，都指令人感到欣慰；intense scrutiny over replicability指通过重复某项调查或实验来验证其真伪。
译文
随着有关气候变化的争论白热化，千万别低估你的对手。审视在全国具有代表性的一项调查时（它调查人们对干细胞研究、大爆炸理论、人类进化、纳米技术、转基因食物和气候变化的看法），卡耐基梅隆大学的研究者发现，接受教育最多的、在科学素养测试中得分最高的被调查者之间的看法两级化最严重。这一观察结论昨天发表在美国《国家科学院院刊》杂志。
在气候变化上，研究者发现，与学术才智或科学修养相比，政治身份是一个更重要的信号，能表明被调查人站在什么立场上。作者们写道：“得分更高的保守者显示对气候变化不怎么关心，而得分高的自由派显示更关心。这些模式表明，科学知识可能被用来维护出于非科学动机而坚持的立场。”
这表明存在着研究者称做“被促动的推理”的现象，即人们心里装着目标来评价事实和数据，通常是为了表达对某个政治群体的忠诚。就气候变化而言，这意味着那些最热衷呼吁人们采取行动降低温室气体排放的人，和那些认为平均温度不断升高不构成问题的人，都可以借助同一组证据支持自己的观点。
这也意味着，在对手面前挥舞科学研究和研究发现的大棒在争论时不可能改变其想法，事实上这可能进一步使对手坚信自己的见解。Dan Kahan是耶鲁大学法学院法学和心理学教授，他没有参加这项研究，他指出，“你在气候变化上的看法更多地表明了你站在哪一边”。在气候变化上拥有某种见解体现你与政治盟友的团结，这跟某人熟悉不熟悉科学方法无关。“这不是衡量他们知道多少的尺度，而是衡量他们是谁的尺度”，他说。
他解释说，在气候变化上的分歧之间架起桥梁，把这个问题同其政治象征相分离，集中关注实际的经济问题——比如解决海平面的上升问题，这将给政府官员提供一种手段，让他们既能解决这一问题，也不会威胁到他们与选民之间的忠诚。Kahan说，新的发现确认了越来越多的一大堆研究，它们研究人们如何形成对气候变化的看法。他说，“以前有人研究更多的科学知识对文化上的分歧的影响，知道这些研究的发现能被重复令人感到欣慰”，他补充说，在一个许多社会科学的发现在可重复性上面临严厉审查的时代，这些发现特别令人感到欣慰。
TEXT 80
Volkswagen, an esteemed global manufacturer, and emblem of Germany's purposefully productive capitalism, has been caught doing something that would make the most shameless banker blush. Volkswagen has been applying the technical wisdom for which it is so admired to the task of tripping up the American regulators that are tasked with protecting the air that citizens breathe.
Of course, there are important questions about exactly which executive knew what—investigations need to root all that out with urgency.But having installed customized “defeat” software to reduce the pollution produced by its diesel engines during tests, and not out on the road, the company can hardly invoke the standard “sorry, our attention was elsewhere” excuse. No, this looks like very deliberate manipulation. This tale is a rude reminder that commercial skulduggery is not the exclusive preserve of finance.
The most immediate implications are for the German company itself. Half a million vehicles were immediately recalled in the US, each potentially incurring a fine of up to $37,500, implying a theoretical maximum bill of $18bn-plus. And that's before we get on to knock-on costs of compensating consumers, lawsuit and damage to a powerful brand that is built on reliability, not to mention another 10.5m vehicles worldwide, which VW conceded today could also end up being caught up in the scandal.
The next wave of questions affects the wider car industry. If it was this easy to clean up emissions for inspection, one has to wonder whether other manufacturers were at it too. The tobacco sector has a long and shaming history of damaging lungs while concealing the evidence; any motor manufacturers who have been doing something can expect to face similar disgrace. There are more particular questions about diesel engines. VW has been a commercial advocate, but many European governments have also been privileging the fuel through taxation because it tends to be more carbon-efficient than petrol. If the authorities have been operating on an incomplete picture here, then public policy will have been distorted.
Presuming, of course, that public policy would otherwise have been protecting the environment, rather than lending support to industries. It was American, not European, regulators who caught VW out. In the darkest scenario of all, the authorities will not want to probe too deeply into the pollution data that sends out of engines produced by domestic “champions”. If the mismeasurement of pollution is so easily done, there will be political as well as commercial rules to distort.
1.What is wrong with Volkswagen?
[A] It is now careless of its technical details.
[B] It makes the same mistake bankers make.
[C] It neglects the U.S. regulations about air.
[D] It misuses its technical wisdom for cheating.
2.The word“skulduggery” probably means_____.
[A] operation
[B] fraud
[C] software
[D] intention
3.The first sentence of the third paragraph means that_____.
[A] the ultimate victim of the scandal is Volkswagen itself
[B] consumer compensation will be too heavy for Volkswagen to bear
[C] lawsuits around the world will soon follow those in the U.S.
[D] Volkswagen understands the implication of the scandal at once
4.It can be inferred that the tobacco industry is mentioned because_____.
[A] both the car industry and it prove to be a disgrace
[B] both the car industry and it are commercial advocates
[C] both emissions and smoking damage people's lungs
[D] it is subjected to heavy taxation like the car industry
5.The main purpose of the author is to_____.
[A] expose possible scandals of the car industry
[B] explore the reasons for the Volkswagen scandal
[C] analyze the implications of the Volkswagen scandal
[D] urge governments to tighten emission control
考研必备词汇
其他词汇
1.skul（l）duggery 欺骗，做假
2.clean up 处理；清理
疑难长句注解
1.Volkswagen has been applying...breathe. （第一段）
本句的主干结构是Volkswagen has been applying...to the task of...，即“大众公司一直把……用来干……”。句子中包含三个定语从句，第一个which...admired修饰wisdom，第二个that are...breathe修饰regulators，第三个that citizens breathe修饰the air。
2.But having installed customized...excuse. （第二段）
本句中，“defeat” software是大众公司用来“击败”检测系统的软件；produced...the road是过去分词短语，作定语修饰pollution；动词invoke的宾语是excuse，即“用……借口”，standard是形容词，意为“标准的，常用的”。
3.And that's before we get...the scandal. （第三段）
本句中，that指上一句提到的180多亿美元的罚款（fine），that's before we get on to的字面意思是“在我们进展到……之前”，这里应该被理解为“这还不包括”或“接下来就是”；knock-on指causing other events to happen one after another in a series，相当于说“引起连锁反应的”，not to mention意为“更不用说”，end up doing sth.意为“结果是”，catch sb. up in意为“逮着某人做某事”。
4.If the authorities have been...distorted. （第四段）
本句中authorities指上面提到的regulators（监管机构），词组operate on意为“按……操作/运作”；incomplete picture的表面意思是“不完整的真相”，这里指大众公司隐瞒排放信息。
5.Presuming, of course, that...industries. （第五段）
本句不是一个完整的句子，而是一个现在分词短语。副词otherwise相当于说if public policy has not been distorted，词组lend support to意为“给予……支持”。
6.In the darkest scenario...champions. （第五段）
本句中，in the darkest scenario of all的意思是“我们能想到的最糟糕的情况是”，词组probe into意为“探究，详细调查”；that sends out engines修饰data，指发动机显示的污染数据；produced by domestic “champions”是分词短语，修饰engines。
译文
大众汽车公司是全球受人尊重的制造商，是德国专门从事生产行业的资本主义企业的标志，它被发现做了让那些最无耻的银行家都脸红的事情。大众汽车一直使用它本来备受赞赏的技术才智来欺骗美国监管者，这些监管者承担着保护美国公民吸入的空气的任务。
当然，还有一些重要问题需要弄清楚，比如到底哪位主管知道多少事情——所有这些都急需通过调查来正本清源。但是，大众公司安装了预制的“欺骗”软件，在检测时减低了其柴油发动机产生的污染指标，可在室外的路上跑时污染指标却没有降低，这可不是用那种“对不起，我们没注意到”这样的典型借口就能获得原谅的。绝对不能，因为这看上去是故意的操纵。这件事情残酷地提醒我们，商业欺诈不是金融业的保留项目。
最直接的影响就是对这家德国公司本身了。50万辆车在美国被立刻召回，每一辆可能招致多达37500美元的罚款，这意味着，从理论上来说最高罚款总额会达到180多亿美元，这还不包括赔偿消费者、诉讼可能涉及的连锁成本，不包括对这个建立在可靠性之上的强大品牌造成的[名誉]损害，更不用说全球范围内还有1050万辆汽车。大众汽车公司今天承认，这些车辆最终也可能陷入丑闻风波。
第二波问题涉及更广范围的汽车行业。如果这么容易处理一下排放就能蒙骗监管，人们要问：其他制造商是否也干了类似的事情。烟草行业隐藏证据，长期以来恬不知耻地损伤着人们的肺；任何干类似事情的汽车制造商有望面临类似的耻辱。柴油引擎还有更具体的问题。大众公司一直是一个商业鼓吹者，但是许多欧洲政府也通过征税赋予柴油的使用以特权，因为柴油比汽油碳效率更高。如果监管机构不了解事情的真相，那么公共政策就会被扭曲。
当然，我们需假定公共政策没有被扭曲，有效地保护着环境，而不是盲目地支持各行各业。逮着大众公司骗人的是美国的监管者，而不是欧洲的监管者。从最黑暗的情况来考虑，监管当局不想对本国“冠军企业”生产的发动机发出的污染数据做太深入的调查。如果对污染指标的错误测量这么容易办到，那么肯定有政治和商业法规被扭曲了。
TEXT 81
When it comes to key warriors in America's battle over the causes of climate change, few rival Pennsylvania State University professor Michael E. Mann.
Much of the industrial and developing world believes that the burning of fossil fuels, and other activities that release heat-trapping greenhouse gases, contribute to climate change. A March survey by Gallup shows that 53 percent of Americans attribute global warming to human activity. But in the past three years, some Americans have challenged this view, particularly conservative Republicans, and the political elite is sharply divided.
Mann's new book, The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars, is part of a series of attempts by activists and others to answer the question of why global warming has become a political flash point. Likening climate scientists to zebras, he writes, “The climate change deniers isolate individual scientists just as predators on the Serengeti Plain of Africa hunt their prey: picking off vulnerable individuals from the rest of the herd.” He asserts that he and others have become targets because their findings challenge the deep-rooted fossil-fuel industries, which have tried to discredit them.
There is no question that Mann has found himself the target of those who promote the idea that global warming stems from nonhuman factors, such as sun spots and natural temperature variability. Two Canadians, mining consultant Stephen McIntyre and economist Ross McKitrick, challenged his theory on a variety of fronts. First they went after the nature of Mann's data; later they employed the same statistical tool that Mann and his colleagues did, but in what Mann considers an inconsistent way. The result was a smoothing out of the pattern embodied in the hockey stick. “If there is a lesson” in these sorts of fights, Mann writes, “it is that scientific findings that rest on such technical complexities are prone to abuse by those with a potential ax to grind.”
The strength of Mann's book lies in the light he sheds on how the scientific peer-review process works, along with his first-hand account of his role in the national political warfare. Mann began working on his PhD with the assumption “that natural variability might be more important than some scientists thought,” and he takes the reader through his professional and personal conversion to a climate activist. Rather than confining his work to academia, he now battles his opponents on the Web, on talk shows and in print. He details with pride how an increasing number of researchers have joined in the debate: “My fellow scientists will be fighting back, and I look forward to joining them in this battle.”
1.The text is_____.
[A] a brief biography of a climate activist
[B] a review of a recently published book
[C] a scientific report on climate change
[D] a political expression of a scientific standpoint
2.Conservative Republicans and industrialists_____.
[A] attribute the rise of temperature to the burning of fossil fuels
[B] accuse the climate activists of politicizing climate change
[C] deny that they are divided in political standpoint
[D] deny that climate change is caused by human activity
3.The Serengeti strategy is used by_____.
[A] climate scientists to explain why the criticism against them is wrong
[B] climate change deniers to make the climate activists unbelievable
[C] Mann and his fellow scientists to counteract public criticism
[D] vulnerable scientists to defend themselves again their predators
4.The author mentions the two Canadians to show_____.
[A] how difficult it is for misunderstanding to be smoothed out
[B] why global warming is not caused by natural phenomena
[C] how scientific findings can be misused for personal motives
[D] what lesson can be learned from our failure to save the climate
5.As to his new role of being a climate activist, Mann seems to_____.
[A] accept it with reluctance
[B] be glad to assume it
[C] dislike its political nature
[D] reject it downright
考研必备词汇
其他词汇
1.hockey 曲棍球
2.flash point 引爆点，触发点
3.pick off 有选择地瞄准射击
4.smoothing 精加工，滤清
疑难长句注解
1.Likening climate...of the herd. （第三段）
句中，liken...to意为“把……比作”，Mann把科学家比作塞伦盖蒂平原（在非洲）的猎物，而把否认气候变暖的人比作掠食者，这些人单挑出（isolate）容易攻击的科学家进行攻击，就像狮子从斑马中挑出弱者进行攻击一样。在just as引导的比较状语从句，on the Serengeti Plain of Africa是定语，修饰predators。
2.The result was a smoothing...stick.（第四段）
句中，smooth out意为“抹平，消除”，the pattern embodied in the hockey stick指地球温度在上世纪中期以来出现的骤升现象。
3.The strength of Mann's book...warfare.（第五段）
句中shed light on意为“对……的阐释”，peer-review指同行之间的评议。
4.Mann began working...activist.（第五段）
本句是由and连接的并列句。在前半句中，that natural...thought是assumption的同位语从句；在后半句中，takes the reader through的意思是：在他的书中，Mann谈到他由反对全球变暖理论转变到拥护该理论的过程。
译文
当提到气候变化原因美国战场上的主要斗士时，很少有人能和宾夕法尼亚州立大学教授Michael E. Mann匹敌。
许多工业化和发展中世界国家相信，燃烧化石燃料以及释放吸热温室气体的其他活动导致气候变化。盖洛普3月的一份调查问卷显示，53%的美国人将全球变暖归因于人类活动。但是在过去三年，一些美国人质疑了这个观念——尤其是保守的共和党人，政治精英们存在明显分歧。
Mann的新书《曲棍球棒与气候战争》是一系列尝试中的一部分，借此，社会活动家和其他人旨在回答全球变暖为什么成了一个政治爆发点。他将气候科学家比作斑马，他写道：“否认气候变化的人孤立个体的科学家，就像非洲塞伦盖蒂平原上的猎食者捕杀它们的猎物一样：从猎物群中挑出脆弱的个体。”他断言，他和其他人成为众矢之的，是因为他们的发现对根深蒂固的化石燃料行业提出了挑战，这些行业试图败坏他们的名声。
毫无疑问，Mann发现自己成为一些人的标靶，这些人宣扬全球变暖源于太阳黑子和自然的气温变化等非人类因素的思想。两名加拿大人，矿业顾问Stephen McIntyre和经济学家Ross McKitrick从几个方面挑战他的理论。首先，他们质疑Mann的数据的性质；然后他们使用了与Mann及其同事相同的统计工具，但是Mann认为他们使用的方式前后矛盾。结果是消除了曲棍球棒形状所体现的模式，从这类论战中“如果我们应吸取一个教训的话，” Mann写道，“那就是，依赖于这种复杂技术的科学发现容易被不怀好意的人滥用。”
Mann的书的长处在于他阐明了科学的同行审阅过程是怎样运作的，他也亲自说明了自己在这场全国性的政治斗争中的角色。Mann开始写博士论文时的假设是“自然变化可能比某些科学家认为的更加重要”，他引导读者了解自己在专业和个人方面向气候活动家上的转变。他没有将自己的工作限于学术界，他目前在网络、谈话节目和出版物上抨击自己的对手。他骄傲地详述了越来越多的研究者是怎样加入这场争论的：“与我观点相同的科学家将会回击，而我期待着在战场上加入他们。”
TEXT 82
The United States experienced some of the most extreme weather events in its history this spring, including deadly outbreaks of tornadoes, near-record flooding, drought and wildfires. Damages from these disasters have already passed $32 billion, and the hurricane season, which is just beginning, is projected to be above average, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Government scientists said Wednesday that the frequency of extreme weather has increased over the past two decades, in part as a result of global warming caused by the accumulation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. But they were careful not to blame humans for this year's series of deadly events, saying that in some ways weather patterns were returning to those seen at the beginning of the last century. “Looking at long-term patterns since 1980, indeed, extreme climatological and meteorological events have increased,” said Thomas R. Karl, director of NOAA's National Climatic Data Center. “But in the early part of the 20th century, there was also a tendency for more extreme events followed by a quiet couple of decades.”
Presenting a new NOAA report on 2011 extreme weather, Dr. Karl said that extremes of precipitation have increased as the planet warms and more water evaporates from the oceans. He also said models suggest that as carbon dioxide builds up in the atmosphere and heats the planet, droughts will increase in frequency and intensity. “But it is difficult and unlikely to discern a human fingerprint, if there is one, on the drought record of the United States,” he said.
Some other climate scientists were more categorical about the human contribution to extreme climate events. Kevin Trenberth, distinguished senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, said that when the greenhouse effect caused by burning fossil fuels is added to the natural variability of climate, weather disasters can be expected to occur more frequently. “Global warming is contributing to an increased incidence of extreme weather because the environment in which all storms form has changed from human activities,” Dr. Trenberth said in a telephone interview Wednesday. “Records are not just broken, they are smashed. It is as clear a warning as we are going to get about prospects for the future.”
April was a particularly devastating month for tornadoes and rainfall, with 875 tornadoes reported during the month and heavy rain and snowmelt contributing to Mississippi River flooding later in the spring that surpassed the historic floods of 1927 and 1937. So far this year, there have been nearly 1,400 preliminary tornado reports nationwide; those reports will most likely be whittled down to about 900 confirmed tornadoes, the second-highest annual total recorded in modern times. The record is 1,011 confirmed tornadoes in 2008. The year also is on track to be one of the deadliest, with 536 fatalities so far from tornadoes, placing 2011 in sixth place in United States history and the deadliest since 1936.
1.While scientists see more deadly weather, they_____.
[A] have dispute over the causes
[B] don't think the situation is deteriorating
[C] admit that it is not the worst in history
[D] assess the damages as being below average
2.According to Dr. Karl, extreme weather is mainly attributable to_____.
[A] arbitrary human activities
[B] changing weather patterns
[C] an increase in climatological events
[D] human failure to control the weather
3.Which of the following would blame human activities for the increase in extreme weather?
[A] Thomas R. Karl.
[B] Kevin Trenberth.
[C] The NOAA.
[D] Government scientists.
4. Those who blame human activities attribute heightened extreme weather to_____.
[A] the natural climatological and meteorological variability
[B] the increased frequency and intensity of storms and droughts
[C] the higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere
[D] the global warming caused by evaporation from the ocean
5.The number of tornadoes mentioned in the last paragraph indicates that_____.
[A] the tornadoes have been the number one killers in United States since 1927
[B] 2011 will see the greatest number of tornadoes in the history of the United States
[C] flooding has caused the greatest number of casualties in recent years
[D] the frequency of extreme weather has dramatically increased in recent years
考研必备词汇
其他词汇
1.precipitation 降雨量
2.categorical 绝对的；确信的；分类的
3.whittle down 削减，逐渐减少
疑难长句注解
1.But it is difficult...of the United States. （第三段）
本句中，human fingerprint on the drought record指由人为因素导致的干旱，而if there is one是插入语，意思是：如果有人为因素的话。
2.Records are not just broken, they are smashed. （第四段）
本句的意思是：极端天气的发生频率不仅破了纪录，而且是大大打破了纪录。
译文
今年春天美国经历了有史以来几次最极端的气象事件，包括龙卷风、接近历史纪录的洪涝、干旱和森林大火等极端事件的爆发。这些灾难造成的损失已经超过了320亿美元，并且，据国家海洋和气象局预测，刚刚开始的飓风季预计将长于平均年份。
政府科学家在周三说，极端天气发生的频率在过去的20年中增加了，部分是由大气中二氧化碳聚集引起的全球变暖所致。但是他们却很谨慎，不将今年一连串极端事件归罪于人类，他们说，在某种意义上气象模式正在恢复至上世纪初我们所看到的那种模式。“看看1980年以来的长期模式，的确，极端的气候和气象事件增加了，” NOAA国家气候数据中心主任Thomas R. Karl说，“但是，20世纪早期，在平静了20年之后，也出现了发生更极端事件的趋势。”
Karl博士展示了NOAA关于2011年极端天气的一份新报告，他说，随着地球变暖以及更多的水从海洋蒸发，各种极端降水现象增加了。他还说，模型证明，随着二氧化碳在大气中聚集，使地球变热，干旱的频率和强度都会增加。“但是很难甚至几乎不可能在美国的干旱记录上辨别出人类的指纹——即使真的有，”他说。
其他的一些气候科学家更加肯定造成极端气象事件的人为因素。国家气象研究中心著名的资深科学家Kevin Trenberth说，当将燃烧矿物燃料导致的温室效应加到气候的自然可变性中时，天气灾难可望更频繁地发生。“全球变暖正导致极端天气的增多，原因是暴风雨形成的环境已经被人类活动改变了，” Trenberth博士在周三的电话采访中说，“纪录不是仅仅被打破了，而是被粉碎了。对于未来的前景，这一警示与我们将获得的任何东西一样清晰。”
4月是一个备受龙卷风和降雨侵扰的月份，在这个月中报道的875次龙卷风、大雨和融雪水在春末导致了密西西比河洪水泛滥，已经超出了1927年和1937年的洪水纪录。今年到现在为止，全国有接近 1400份龙卷风预告；这些报告极有可能被削减到约900次被确认的龙卷风，是现代纪录中高居第二位的年总量。2008年有1011次被确认的龙卷风纪录。今年也正成为最致命的年份之一，龙卷风至今已导致536人丧命，使得2011年在美国历史上处于第6的位置，而且是1936年以来致人死亡最多的一年。
TEXT 83
From the 18th through the mid-19th century, whale oil provided light to much of the Western world. At its peak, whaling employed 70,000 people and was the United States' fifth-largest industry. The U.S. stood as the world's foremost whale killer. Producing millions of gallons of oil each year, the industry was widely seen as unassailable, with advocates scoffing at would-be illumination substitutes like lard oil and camphene. Without whale oil, so the thinking went, the world would slide backward toward darkness.
By today's standard, of course, slaughtering whales is considered barbaric. Two hundred years ago there was no environmental movement to speak of. But one wonders if the whalers, finding that each year they needed to go farther afield from Nantucket Island to kill massive sea mammals, ever asked themselves: what will happen when we run out of whales? Such questions today constitute the cornerstone of the ever-louder logic of sustainability.
Climate alarmists and campaigning environmentalists argue that the industrialized countries of the world have made sizable withdrawals on nature's fixed allowance, and unless we change our ways, and soon, we are doomed to an abrupt end. Take the recent proclamation from the United Nations Environment Program, which argued that governments should dramatically cut back on the use of resources. The message has become commonplace: our current way of living is selfish and unsustainable. We are wrecking the world. We are cutting down the rainforest. We are polluting the water. We are polluting the air. We are killing plants and animals, destroying the ozone layer, burning the world through our addiction to fossil fuels, and leaving a devastated planet for future generations. In other words, humanity is doomed.
It is a compelling story, no doubt. It is also fundamentally wrong, and the consequences are severe. Tragically, exaggerated environmental worries—and the willingness of so many to believe them—could ultimately prevent us from finding smarter ways to actually help our planet and ensure the health of the environment for future generations.
Because, our fears notwithstanding, we actually get smarter. Although Westerners were once reliant on whale oil for lighting, we never actually ran out of whales. Why? High demand and rising prices for whale oil spurred a search for and investment in the 19th-century version of alternative energy. First, kerosene from petroleum replaced whale oil. We didn't run out of kerosene, either: electricity replaced it because it was a superior way to light our planet.
For generations, we have consistently underestimated our capacity for innovation. There was a time when we worried that all of London would be covered with horse manure because of the increasing use of horse-drawn carriages. Thanks to the invention of the car, London has 7 million inhabitants today. Dung disaster averted.
In fact, would-be catastrophes have regularly been pushed aside throughout human history, and so often because of innovation and technological development. We never just continue to do the same old thing. We innovate and avoid the anticipated problems.
1.By mentioning the whale oil, the author means to make the point that_____.
[A] killing whales used to be a necessary evil
[B] whale oil could hardly be replaced by lard oil and camphene
[C] whale-killing triggered the modern environmental movement
[D] people can often find substitutes for exhaustible things through innovation
2.From the last sentence of second paragraph we learn that_____.
[A] people have stopped disputing the practice of whale killing
[B] the number of whales has risen despite mass slaughter
[C] modern society is more alert to the sustainability of nature
[D] environmentalists have brought whale killing to an abrupt end
3.According to the author, the message from the UN Environment Program_____.
[A] should be taken seriously if we want to save humanity
[B] can only hinder humans from averting possible disasters
[C] has exaggerated the situation but is true of the present world
[D] has offered us nothing new about the sustainability of the planet
4. The cases of horse manure and whale oil are similar in that_____.
[A] both of the problems existed in the 18th and 19th centuries
[B] both of them were used for illuminating homes and streets
[C] both examples demonstrate the power of human innovation
[D] neither of them made humans worried about their exhaustion
5.The author's attitude to the environmentalists' alarming rhetoric is_____.
[A] negative
[B] supportive
[C] impersonal
[D] defensive
考研必备词汇
其他词汇
1.unassailable 无懈可击的；不容怀疑的
2.lard 猪油
3.camphene 莰烯
4.far afield 远方，远处
5.alarmist 大惊小怪者，杞人忧天者
疑难长句注解
1.Climate alarmists...an abrupt end. （第三段）
本句中，alarmist指爱大惊小怪的人或危言耸听的人，campaigning environmentalist指为环保事业而组织活动或大声疾呼的人，withdrawals on nature's allowance实际上是用[到银行等处] 提钱作为比喻，形容对自然资源的透支；and soon是省略句，即unless we change our ways soon。
2.Because, our fears notwithstanding, we actually get smarter. （第五段）
本句是省略句，承前省略了主句。副词notwithstanding（尽管）放在被修饰词的后面。
译文
从18世纪到19世纪中叶，鲸油为西方世界的大部分地方提供了光明。在其顶峰时期，捕鲸业雇用了7万人，是美国第五大产业。美国是当时世界上最主要的鲸鱼杀戮者。每年生产数百万加仑鲸油，这个产业曾经被广泛认为是不可攻破的，支持者们甚至嘲讽可能作为照明替代品的猪油和莰烯。根据当时的看法，如果没有鲸油，世界将会滑回到黑暗中。
当然，按照现在的标准来看，杀鲸被认为是野蛮的。两百年前还没有人提到环境保护运动。但是有人禁不住要问，那些捕鲸人发现他们每年都要从楠塔基特岛走更远，到现场去捕杀大量的海洋哺乳动物，他们是否曾问过自己：如果鲸鱼被我们捕杀尽了将会发生什么？这样的问题今天成为可持续发展概念的根本问题，对可持续发展的呼吁变得越来越响亮。
担心气候的人和为保护环境而呼吁的人争辩说，世界上的工业化国家已经从大自然的核定供给数额中提取了大量的资源，除非我们改变自己的做法，否则很快我们将注定要突然走进一个死胡同。以联合国环境项目部在最近发布的声明为例，声明中说，各国政府应该大幅削减资源的使用量。这些论调已经是老生常谈：我们目前的生活方式是自私的，无法持久。我们在破坏地球，我们在砍伐雨林，我们在污染水源，我们在污染空气。我们在伤害植物和动物，破坏臭氧层，通过燃烧矿物燃料在烧毁整个世界，为后代留下一个满目疮痍的星球。换句话说，人类劫数难逃。
无疑，这是一个极具说服力的故事。这同时也是根本上错误的，而且其后果还很严重。不幸的是，对环境的过分担忧——以及有那么多人愿意分享这些担忧——将会最终阻止我们找到更聪明的方法，来真正帮助我们的星球，并为子孙后代确保一个健康的环境。
因为尽管我们感到恐惧，但我们实际上却变得越来越聪明。虽然西方人的确曾经依靠鲸油来照明，但我们实际上并没有把鲸鱼捕完。为什么？高涨的需求以及鲸油价格的不断上升，刺激人们在19世纪寻找和投资他们所认为的可替代的能源。首先，从石油中提炼的煤油代替了鲸油。我们也并没有让煤油枯竭：电取代了它，因为这是点亮我们星球的一个更好的方式。
历代以来，我们一贯地低估我们的创新能力。曾经有段时间我们担心整个伦敦将为马粪所覆盖，因为越来越多的人在使用马车。多亏汽车的发明，现在伦敦已拥有700万居民。动物粪便灾难被化解了。
实际上，在人类历史上，那些即将发生的灾难经常能被抛到一边，并且经常是因为创新和科技的进步。我们从没有一成不变地做着同样的事情。我们创新，然后就能避开预期的问题。
TEXT 84
We were told by oil industry executives and their acolytes and enablers in government that deep-water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico would not cause the kind of catastrophe that we've been watching with an acute and painful sense of helplessness for the past three months. Advances in technology, they said, would ward off the worst-case scenarios. Americans are not particularly good at learning even the most painful lessons. Denial is our default mode. But at the very least this tragedy in the gulf should push us to look much harder at the systems we need to prevent a catastrophic accident at a nuclear power plant, and for responding to such an event if it occurred.
Nuclear plants are the new hot energy item. The Obama administration is offering federal loan guarantees to encourage the construction of a handful of new plants in the U.S., the first in decades. There is no way to overstate how cautiously we need to proceed along this treacherous road. Building nuclear power plants is mind-bogglingly expensive, which is why you need taxpayer money to kick-start the process. But the overriding issues we need to be concerned about, especially in light of our horrendous experience with the oil gushing in the gulf for so long, are safety and security.
The problem is that while the most terrible accidents are blessedly rare, when they do occur the consequences are horrific, as we've seen in the gulf. With nuclear plants, the worst-case scenarios are too horrible for most people to want to imagine. Denial takes over with policy makers and the public alike. Something approaching a worst-case accident at a nuclear plant, especially one in a highly populated area, would make the Deepwater Horizon disaster look like a walk in the park.
People of a certain age will remember the frightening accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania in 1979, a partial meltdown that came dangerously close to a worst-case scenario. As Mr. Lochbaum put it, “In roughly two hours, conditions at the plant rendered it from a billion-dollar asset to a multibillion-dollar liability. It cost more to clean up than it cost to build it.”
The potential problems with nuclear power abound. No one knows what to do with the dangerous nuclear waste that is building up at the plants. And no one wants to have an extended conversation in polite company about the threat of terrorists who could wreak all manner of mayhem with an attack on a plant.
For many very serious people, our overreliance on foreign oil and the potential dire consequences of global warming make the case for moving more toward nuclear energy a compelling one. But if this is done without a whole lot more serious thought given to matters of safety and rigorous oversight, it's a step we'll undoubtedly come to regret.
1.What is Americans' typical reaction when a disastrous event occurs?
[A] Learning the lesson by examining the event carefully.
[B] Blaming themselves for not having been more cautious.
[C] Refusing to learn the lesson for avoiding further mistakes.
[D] Feeling helpless and painful but denying such feeling.
2.The most important thing in utilizing nuclear power is_____.
[A] the latest technology
[B] the prevention of accidents
[C] adequate loan guarantees
[D] the innovation in the design
3.The Three Mile Island disaster is mentioned to illustrate_____.
[A] what a worst-case nuclear accident can be like
[B] how a perfect facility can turn into a liability
[C] why the Deepwater Horizon disaster is not a real one
[D] why nuclear disasters can not be prevented
4.Which of the following is mentioned as a threat to nuclear facilities?
[A] The effect of global warming.
[B] The faulty operation of staff.
[C] The disposal of nuclear waste.
[D] A possible terrorist attack.
5.The author thinks that_____.
[A] we are not ready for extensive use of nuclear power
[B] oil-burning should be replaced by nuclear power
[C] negligence is the worst enemy in using nuclear power
[D] nuclear power is one of the main causes for global warming
考研必备词汇
其他词汇
1.acolyte 助手；随从
2.enabler 授权者
3.mind-bogglingly 令人难以置信地
4.kick-start 启动
5.horrendous 可怕的，恐怖的
6.gush 喷出，涌出
7.blessedly 幸好；幸福地
8.wreak 造成；攻击，施行
9.mayhem 大混乱
疑难长句注解
1.But at the very least...occurred.（第一段）
在这个句子中，at the very least意为“至少”；we need是定语从句，修饰systems；介词短语for responding to such an event if it occurred与to prevent a catastrophic accident at a nuclear power plant并列，均表示目的，即“用来预防……并对……做出反应”。
2. There is no way to...road.（第二段）
在这个句子中，there is no way to overstate指“再夸张也不过分”，即应该反复强调要谨慎小心；this treacherous road指发展和利用核能的道路。
3. Denial takes over...the public alike.（第三段）
所谓denial takes over，是指“否认成为主流”，即否认成为常事儿；alike这里是副词，表示二者都一样。
4. Something approaching...in the park.（第三段）
在这个句子中，approaching意为“接近，像”；a walk in the park形容毫不费力气或轻松。
5. For many very serious people...compelling one.（第六段）
在这个句子中，the case for moving more toward nuclear energy（更多地转向核能的理由）是make的宾语，a compelling one是宾语的补语，其中one代替case（在此意为“理由，论据”），即“使……成为一个急迫的理由”。这句的意思是说：对进口油的过分依赖，全球变暖可能造成的后果，使得人们更有理由转向核能的利用。
译文
我们从石油企业主管、他们的助手和政府的授权者那里得知，在墨西哥湾的深海钻探不会引发我们在过去的三个月里用急切而痛苦的无助感观看到的那种灾难。他们说，科技的进步将避免最坏的局面。美国人并不是特别擅长从即使是最惨痛的教训中吸取经验。否认是我们的默认模式。但是至少墨西哥湾的这个悲剧应该敦促我们更认真地检验一下一些系统，我们需要这些系统来防止核电厂的灾难性事故，并且在事故发生时对这类事件做出反应。
核电厂是新的热能项目。奥巴马政府正在提供联邦贷款担保来鼓励在美国建设一批新工厂，这是数十年来第一次这样做。没有言辞能夸大我们在这条变幻莫测的道路上前行需要多么谨慎。建设核电厂令人难以置信地昂贵，这就是为什么需要纳税人的钱来启动这个过程。但是我们需要考虑的最重要问题是安全性和可靠性，特别是鉴于墨西哥湾长时间漏油事件带来的可怕经历。
问题是，虽然最可怕的事故幸好罕见，但是当它们确实发生时后果令人恐惧，正如我们在墨西哥湾看到的那样。就核电厂而言，最坏的局面可怕得令大多数人难以想象。无论对于政策制定者还是公众，否认都占据上风。如果在某个核电厂发生最糟情况的事故，特别是在一个人口高度集中的区域，将会使那次“深水地平线”灾难看起来就像是在公园里散步。
某个年龄段的人们会记得1979年发生在宾夕法尼亚州三里岛核电厂的那次可怕事故，当时发生了局部的堆内熔化，非常危险，近似于一个最糟的局面。正如Lochbaum所描述的那样：“在大约两小时里，核电厂的情况使它从一个十亿美元的资产变成了数十亿美元的债务。用于清理的费用要比用于修建的费用多很多。”
核电厂潜在的问题很多。没有人知道如何处理堆积在核电厂里的危险核废料。而且没有人想要礼貌地进行一次深入的谈话，讨论一下恐怖分子的威胁，因为他们可以通过攻击一个核电厂就能造成各种大混乱。
对于许多严肃的人来说，我们对外国石油的过分依赖以及全球变暖带来的潜在可怕后果提供了充分的理由，使得转而利用核能成为一件紧迫的事情。但是如果不全面认真地考虑安全问题和严格监控问题，这将是我们毫无疑问会后悔的一步。