Question

【題目】 At the World Economic Forum last month, President Trump drew claps when he announced the United States would respond to the forum's proposal to plant one trillion(萬億) trees to fight climate change. The trillion-tree idea won wide attention last summer after a study published in the journal Science concluded that planting so many trees was “the most effective climate change solution to date”.

If only it were true. But it isn't. Planting trees would slow down the planet's warming, but the only thing that will save us and future generations from paying a huge price in dollars, lives and damage to nature is rapid and considerable reductions in carbon release from fossil fuels, to net zero by 2050.

Focusing on trees as the big solution to climate change is a dangerous diversion(偏離). Worse still, it takes attention away from those responsible for the carbon release that are pushing us toward disaster. For example, in the Netherlands, you can pay Shell an additional 1 euro cent for each liter of regular gasoline you put in your tank, to plant trees to balance the carbon release from your driving. That's clearly no more than disaster slightly delayed. The only way to stop this planet from overheating is through political, economic, technological and social solutions that end the use of fossil fuels.

There is no way that planting trees, even across a global area the size of the United States, can absorb the huge amounts of fossil carbon released from industrial societies. Trees do take up carbon from the atmosphere as they grow. But this uptake merely replaces carbon lost when forests were cleared in the first place, usually long ago. Regrowing forests where they once grew can undo some damage done in the past, but even a trillion trees can't store enough carbon to head off dramatic climate changes this century.

In a sharp counter argument to last summer's Paper in Science, Justin Gillis wrote in the same journal in October that the study's findings were inconsistent with the dynamics of the global carbon cycle. He warned that “the claim that global tree restoration(復(fù)原) is our most effective climate solution is simply scientifically incorrect and dangerously misleading”.

【1】What do we know about the trillion-tree idea?

A.It was published in a journal.

B.It was proposed last summer.

C.It was put forward by Trump.

D.It drew lots of public attention.

【2】What is paragraph 3 mainly about?

A.A drawback of the tree planting strategy.

B.An example of balancing carbon release.

C.An anecdote of making a purchase at Shell.

D.A responsibility for politicians and economists.

【3】What was Justin Gillis's attitude towards global tree restoration?

A.Indifferent.B.Opposed.

C.Hesitant.D.Supportive.

【4】What is the best title for the text?

A.Contradictory Ideas on Tree Planting.

B.A Trillion Trees Come to the Rescue.

C.Planting Trees Won't Save the World.

D.The Best Solution to Climate Change.

Answer 1

【答案】

【1】D

【2】A

【3】B

【4】C

【解析】

本文為一篇議論文。文章論述了作者不贊成美國總統(tǒng)Trump響應(yīng) “種一萬億棵樹”來對抗氣候變化的倡議，作者認(rèn)為真正能解決問題的方法是迅速地大量減少碳排放。

【1】

細(xì)節(jié)理解題。根據(jù)第一段The trillion-tree idea won wide attention last summer after a study published in the journal Science concluded that planting so many trees was “the most effective climate change solution to date”.去年夏天，發(fā)表在《科學(xué)》雜志上的一項(xiàng)研究得出結(jié)論，大量種樹是“迄今為止最有效的氣候變化解決方案”，這 “一萬億棵樹”的想法贏得了廣泛關(guān)注�？芍�，一萬億樹的想法引起了公眾的廣泛關(guān)注。故選D項(xiàng)。

【2】

主旨大意題。根據(jù)第三段Focusing on trees as the big solution to climate change is a dangerous diversion(偏離). Worse still, it takes attention away from those responsible for the carbon release that are pushing us toward disaster. 把樹木作為解決氣候變化的主要辦法是一種危險(xiǎn)的轉(zhuǎn)移。更糟糕的是，它把注意力從那些對碳排放負(fù)責(zé)的人身上移開，正是這些人把我們推向?yàn)?zāi)難。因此，第3段主要論述了以植樹來保護(hù)環(huán)境的缺點(diǎn)。故選A項(xiàng)。

【3】

推理判斷題。根據(jù)最后一段In a sharp counter argument to last summer's Paper in Science, Justin Gillis wrote in the same journal in October that the study's findings were inconsistent with the dynamics of the global carbon cycle. He warned that “the claim that global tree restoration(復(fù)原) is our most effective climate solution is simply scientifically incorrect and dangerously misleading”. Justin Gillis在《科學(xué)》雜志上發(fā)表了與去年夏天《科學(xué)》雜志公布的研究結(jié)果截然相反的觀點(diǎn)，他認(rèn)為去年夏天公布的那個(gè)研究結(jié)果是不符合地球碳循環(huán)動(dòng)力學(xué)的。同時(shí)，他發(fā)出警告：通過植樹來解決氣候問題是不科學(xué)的，是錯(cuò)誤的，是危險(xiǎn)的，是具有誤導(dǎo)性的。推測，Justin Gillis對植樹提議是持反對態(tài)度的。故選B項(xiàng)。

【4】

主旨大意題。結(jié)合全文，文章論述了作者不贊成美國總統(tǒng)Trump響應(yīng) “種一萬億棵樹”來對抗氣候變化的倡議，作者認(rèn)為真正能解決問題的方法是迅速地大量減少碳排放，種樹的想法是不科學(xué)的，且具有誤導(dǎo)性。C項(xiàng)“植樹不會(huì)拯救世界�！狈�合文章主旨，適合作為標(biāo)題。故選C項(xiàng)。