题目内容
Cutting global warming pollution would not only make the planet healthier, it would make people healthier too, new research suggests.
Cutting carbon dioxide emissions could save millions of lives, mostly by reducing preventable deaths from heart and lung diseases, according to studies released Wednesday and published in a special issue of The Lancet British medical journal.
“Relying on fossil fuels leads to unhealthy lifestyles, increasing our chances for getting sick and in some cases takes years from our lives,” US Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a telecast (电视广播) briefing from her home state of Kansas. “As greenhouse gas emissions go down, so do deaths from cardiovascular (心血管的) and respiratory diseases (呼吸疾病). This is not a small effect.”
Instead of looking at the health ills caused by future global warming, as past studies have done, this research looks at the immediate benefits of doing something about the problem, said Linda Birnbaum, director of the US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
Some possible benefits seemed highly speculative (投机的,推测的), the researchers conceded (承认,给予), based on people driving less and walking and cycling more. Other proposals studied were more concrete and achievable, such as reducing cook stoves that burn dung (粪便), charcoal and other polluting fuels in the developing world.
And cutting carbon dioxide emissions also makes the air cleaner, reducing lung damage for millions of people, doctors said.
“Here are ways you can attack major health problems at the same time as dealing with climate change," said lead author Dr. Paul Wilkinson, an environmental epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
Wilkinson said the individual studies came up with numbers of premature deaths prevented or extra years of life added for certain places.
For example, switching to low-polluting cars in London and Delhi, India, would save 160 lost years of life in London and nearly 1,700 in Delhi for every million residents, one study found. But if people also drove less and walked or biked more, those extra saved years would soar (高耸,高涨) to more than 7,300 years in London and 12,500 years in Delhi because of less heart disease.
1.What does the passage mainly about?
A. How can people live longer.
B. Cutting carbon dioxide emissions saves life.
C. Global warming threatens people’s lives
D. People should stop relying on fossil fuels
2.The new research differs from past studies in that ________.
A. it focuses on the immediate benefits of cutting carbon dioxide emissions
B. it studies the bad effects arising from future global warming
C. it is believed by most people
D. it mainly targets at developing countries
3.According to Kathleen Sebelius ________.
A. sometimes it takes years to see the bad effects caused by consuming fossil fuels
B. without greenhouse gas emissions, people would not die of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases
C. the main reason why people get sick is that they rely on fossil fuels
D. death from cardiovascular and respiratory diseases are closely related to greenhouse gas emissions
4.It can be inferred from the passage that ________.
A. London and Delhi have already benefited from reducing greenhouse gas emissions
B. switching to low-polluting cars would save 160 lives in London every year
C. walking and biking instead of driving will reduce the chance of heart disease
D. attacking health problems and dealing with climate change are contradictory
1.B
2.A
3.D
4.C
【解析】
试题分析:文章主要介绍的是环境污染和疾病之间的关系。新的研究表明,减少全球温室气体污染不仅将使地球更健康,也将使人们更健康。减少温室气体的排放,能够降低心脏病和肺病的发病率。
1.根据第二段“Cutting carbon dioxide emissions could save millions of lives, mostly by reducing preventable deaths from heart and lung diseases,”可知,减少二氧化碳排放将拯救成千上万的生命。故选B。
2.根据第四段“Instead of looking at the health ills caused by future global warming, as past studies have done, this research looks at the immediate benefits of doing something about the problem”可知,新的研究关注的是减少污染带来的立竿见影的效果。故选A。
3.根据第三段““Relying on fossil fuels leads to unhealthy lifestyles, increasing our chances for getting sick and in some cases takes years from our lives,” ”依靠化石燃料导致不健康的生活方式,增加我们得病的风险,甚至会夺走几年的生命。根据“As greenhouse gas emissions go down, so do deaths from cardiovascular (心血管的) and respiratory diseases (呼吸疾病). This is not a small effect.”可知,温室气体的排放与心血管疾病和呼吸疾病密切相关。故选D。
4.根据最后一段的“But if people also drove less and walked or biked more, those extra saved years would soar (高耸,高涨) to more than 7,300 years in London and 12,500 years in Delhi because of less heart disease.”步行或骑自行车代替开车,能减少心脏病的发生率。故选C。
考点:环境保护类短文阅读
Tony Burke, Australia’s environment minister, says he won’t decide until next year whether the koala should be protected as an endangered species. He was expected to make his decision by the end of October. But that decision has been put off. Burke said he needed more time to go over the latest information about the koala’s population.
In September, an Australian Senate committee reported that there was no question the koala’s population is on the decrease. “But they may not yet be eligible (符合条件) for listing as a threatened species,” said Senator Doug Cameron. “To have such a significant Australian icon(偶像) included on the threatened species list would be a national shame.”
The koala is found only in the eucalyptus (桉树) forests of Australia. And its population is reported to have fallen sharply for many reasons, including the cutting down of forests to make way for human beings’ development, their own illness, climate change and killings by other animals such as wild dogs. And every year many koalas are hit by cars as they are trying to cross the busy roads.
Putting off the decision on protection for the koala “is really bad news,” said Debbie Pointing, the president of the Koala Action Group. “We’ve worked tirelessly for many years to gather data on the populations,” Pointing said. “That data should be enough to make a decision.”
However, Burke pointed out that the Australian government had spent at least $6.3 million on koala conservation efforts since 1996. senators listed efforts that are already underway in Queensland – the construction of special koala bridges as well as fences along roads, to keep the animals out of harm’s way.
Some people say that is not enough. “What we’re doing at the moment is likely to drive this species to extinction,” Queensland University zoologist Bill Ellis said.
“Koalas are an iconic Australian animal,” Burke told Australians. “They hold a special place in the hearts of Australians.”
But it is a fact that if more isn’t done to protect the koala, they might soon hold a place only in Australians’ memories.
1.Tony Burke put off announcing the koala as an endangered species because .
A.he needed more time to examine latest information |
B.he doubted whether koalas’ number is decreasing |
C.he was thinking about ways to protect koalas |
D.he had more important issues to deal with |
2.What is Paragraph 3 mainly about?
A.The habitat of the koala. |
B.Australia’s traffic problems. |
C.The importance of koalas for Australians. |
D.Reasons for the decrease of the koala population. |
3.According to the text, Debbie Pointing thinks that .
A.the construction of special koala bridges is of little use |
B.the government should announce the koala as an endangered species |
C.the government is to blame for the decreasing koala population |
D.koala are becoming less important in Australians’ hearts |
4.It can be learned from the text that Tony Burke .
A.decided to construct more fences along roads |
B.called on Australians to take care of the koala |
C.thought the government has done much for koalas |
D.was optimistic about the koalas’ future |
5.What is the main idea of the text?
A.Australia puts off the decision on whether the koala is endangered. |
B.Australia is taking special measures to protect koalas. |
C.The population of koalas is reducing rapidly. |
D.Australians are concerned about koalas. |