It’s amazing what a little free beer can accomplish. In 1997 the small Danish island of Samso, located in the Kattegat Strail, won a contest hosted by the Danish Ministry of Environment and Energy. Samso, then known for its dairy and pig farms, would become Denmark’s showcase for sustainable power, eventually going carbon-free. How that would happen, however, was far from clear, since the government initially offered no funding, tax breaks or technical expertise(专门知识).

Given that almost all its power came from oil or coal — and the island’s 4,300 residents didn’t know a wind turbine(风力发电机) from a grain silo(谷仓) — Samso seemed an strange choice. Soren Hermansen, though, saw an opportunity. A restless native son who grew up on a family farm, Hermansen was teaching environmental studies at a local school when he heard about Samso’s award. He volunteered to be the first — and only — participant. “I realized this could happen,” he says. “This was realistic.” He may have been the only one who thought so.

Hermansen knew Samso islanders were conservative, but that could be an advantage: once he convinced enough potential first movers to act, the rest would follow. So Hermansen showed up at every community or club meeting to campaign for the renewable-energy project. He pointed to the island’s unexplored potential for wind power and the economic benefits of making Samso energy-independent. He sometimes brought free beer.

It worked. The islanders bought shares in new wind turbines to build 11 large land-based turbines, enough to meet the entire island’s electricity needs. Not satisfied with that, they supported the construction of 10 huge offshore turbines，which provide power that the island’s dependence on cars and ferries needs. Today Samso isn’t just carbon-free — it actually produces 10% more clean electricity than it uses, with the extra power fed back into the national electricity network at a profit.

Hermansen has become a green angel, traveling from country to country telling the story of Samso’s success when he’s not at home running the Energy Academy, a research center for clean power. But he’s the first to say that the real credit belongs to the islanders，and that Samso’s lesson is that environmental change can only come from the ground up.

What was Hermansen’t response to the Samso’s winning the contest?

A. He regarded it as a chance.

B. He was not satisfied with the award.

C. He thought it was strange.

D. He thought it was reasonable.

From the second paragraph we can learn that __________.

A. many Samso islanders participated in the green project actively

B. most Samso islanders were against the renewable energy project

C. Samso has a long history of making use of renewable energy

D. at first people showed little interest in the renewable energy project

Why did Hermansen show up at every community or club meeting?

A. It was his duty to keep the islanders informed of government policies.

B. He wanted to convince the islanders to use clean power instead of oil or coal.

C. He wanted to persuade the islanders to be involved in the wind power project.

D. He wanted to share his beer with other islanders.

What can we learn about Hermansen’s personality from the last paragraph?

A. He is practical.                 B. He is courageous.

C. He is modest.                  D. He is ambitious.

It’s amazing what a little free beer can accomplish. In 1997 the small Danish island of Samso, located in the Kattegat Strail, won a contest hosted by the Danish Ministry of Environment and Energy. Samso, then known for its dairy and pig farms, would become Denmark’s showcase for sustainable power, eventually going carbon-free. How that would happen, however, was far from clear, since the government initially offered no funding, tax breaks or technical expertise(专门知识).
Given that almost all its power came from oil or coal — and the island’s 4,300 residents didn’t know a wind turbine(风力发电机) from a grain silo(谷仓) — Samso seemed an strange choice. Soren Hermansen, though, saw an opportunity. A restless native son who grew up on a family farm, Hermansen was teaching environmental studies at a local school when he heard about Samso’s award. He volunteered to be the first — and only — participant. “I realized this could happen,” he says. “This was realistic.” He may have been the only one who thought so.
Hermansen knew Samso islanders were conservative, but that could be an advantage: once he convinced enough potential first movers to act, the rest would follow. So Hermansen showed up at every community or club meeting to campaign for the renewable-energy project. He pointed to the island’s unexplored potential for wind power and the economic benefits of making Samso energy-independent. He sometimes brought free beer.
It worked. The islanders bought shares in new wind turbines to build 11 large land-based turbines, enough to meet the entire island’s electricity needs. Not satisfied with that, they supported the construction of 10 huge offshore turbines，which provide power that the island’s dependence on cars and ferries needs. Today Samso isn’t just carbon-free — it actually produces 10% more clean electricity than it uses, with the extra power fed back into the national electricity network at a profit.
Hermansen has become a green angel, traveling from country to country telling the story of Samso’s success when he’s not at home running the Energy Academy, a research center for clean power. But he’s the first to say that the real credit belongs to the islanders，and that Samso’s lesson is that environmental change can only come from the ground up.
【小题1】What was Hermansen’t response to the Samso’s winning the contest?

It’s amazing what a little free beer can accomplish. In 1997 the small Danish island of Samso, located in the Kattegat Strail, won a contest hosted by the Danish Ministry of Environment and Energy. Samso, then known for its dairy and pig farms, would become Denmark’s showcase for sustainable power, eventually going carbon-free. How that would happen, however, was far from clear, since the government initially offered no funding, tax breaks or technical expertise(专门知识).

Given that almost all its power came from oil or coal — and the island’s 4,300 residents didn’t know a wind turbine(风力发电机) from a grain silo(谷仓) — Samso seemed an strange choice. Soren Hermansen, though, saw an opportunity. A restless native son who grew up on a family farm, Hermansen was teaching environmental studies at a local school when he heard about Samso’s award. He volunteered to be the first — and only — participant. “I realized this could happen,” he says. “This was realistic.” He may have been the only one who thought so.

Hermansen knew Samso islanders were conservative, but that could be an advantage: once he convinced enough potential first movers to act, the rest would follow. So Hermansen showed up at every community or club meeting to campaign for the renewable-energy project. He pointed to the island’s unexplored potential for wind power and the economic benefits of making Samso energy-independent. He sometimes brought free beer.

It worked. The islanders bought shares in new wind turbines to build 11 large land-based turbines, enough to meet the entire island’s electricity needs. Not satisfied with that, they supported the construction of 10 huge offshore turbines，which provide power that the island’s dependence on cars and ferries needs. Today Samso isn’t just carbon-free — it actually produces 10% more clean electricity than it uses, with the extra power fed back into the national electricity network at a profit.

Hermansen has become a green angel, traveling from country to country telling the story of Samso’s success when he’s not at home running the Energy Academy, a research center for clean power. But he’s the first to say that the real credit belongs to the islanders，and that Samso’s lesson is that environmental change can only come from the ground up.

1.What was Hermansen’t response to the Samso’s winning the contest?

A. He regarded it as a chance.

B. He was not satisfied with the award.

C. He thought it was strange.

D. He thought it was reasonable.

2.From the second paragraph we can learn that __________.

A. many Samso islanders participated in the green project actively

B. most Samso islanders were against the renewable energy project

C. Samso has a long history of making use of renewable energy

D. at first people showed little interest in the renewable energy project

3.Why did Hermansen show up at every community or club meeting?

A. It was his duty to keep the islanders informed of government policies.

B. He wanted to convince the islanders to use clean power instead of oil or coal.

C. He wanted to persuade the islanders to be involved in the wind power project.

D. He wanted to share his beer with other islanders.

4.What can we learn about Hermansen’s personality from the last paragraph?

A. He is practical.                 B. He is courageous.

C. He is modest.                  D. He is ambitious.

(The Guardian)More UK universities should be profiting from ideas
　　A repeated criticism of the UK's university sector is its noticeable weakness in translating new knowledge into new products and services.
　　Recently, the UK National Stem Cell Network warned the UK could lose its place among the world leaders in stem cell research unless adequate funding and legislation could be assured, despite an annual ?40m spent by the Department of Health on all kinds of research.
　　However, we do have to challenge the unthinking complaint that the sector does not do enough in taking ideas to market. The most recent comparative data on the performance of universities and research institutions in Australia, Canada, USA and UK shows that, from a relatively weak starting position, the UK now leads on many indicators of commercialization activity.
　　When viewed at the national level, the policy interventions (interference) of the past decade have helped transformed the performances of UK universities. Evidence suggests the UK's position is much stronger than in the recent past and is still showing improvement. But national data masks the very large variation in the performance of individual universities. The evidence shows that a large number of universities have fallen off the back of the pack, a few perform strongly and the rest chase the leaders.
　　This type of uneven distribution is not strange to the UK and is mirrored across other economies. In the UK, research is concentrated: less than 25% of universities are receiving 75% of the research funding. These same universities are also the institutions producing the greatest share of PhD graduates, science citations, patents and license income. The effect of policies generating long-term resource concentration has also created a distinctive set of universities which are research-led and commercially active. It seems clear that the concentration of research and commercialization work creates differences between universities.
　　The core objective for universities which are research-led must be to maximize the impact of their research efforts. Their purpose is not to generate funds to add to the bottom line of the university or to substitute other income streams. Rather, these universities should be generating the widest range of social, economic and environmental benefits. In return for the scale of investment, they should share their expertise (expert knowledge or skill) in order to build greater confidence in the sector.
　　Part of the economic recovery of the UK will be driven by the next generation of research commercialization spilling out of our universities. On the evidence presented in my report, there are three dozen universities in the UK which are actively engaged in advanced research training and commercialization work.
　　If there was a greater coordination（协调）of technology transfer offices within regions and a simultaneous (happening at the same time) investment in the scale and functions of our graduate schools, universities could, and should, play a key role in positioning the UK for the next growth cycle

1. 1.

   What does the author think of UK universities in terms of commercialization?

   1. A.
      They have lost their leading position in many ways
   2. B.
      They still have a place among the world leaders
   3. C.
      They do not regard it as their responsibility
   4. D.
      They fail to change knowledge into money
2. 2.

   What does the author say about the national data on UK universities’ performance in
   commercialization?

   1. A.
      It masks the fatal weaknesses of government policy
   2. B.
      It indicates their ineffective use of government resources
   3. C.
      It does not rank UK universities in a scientific way
   4. D.
      It does not reflect the differences among universities
3. 3.

   We can infer from Paragraph 5 that “policy interventions (in Paragraph 4)” refers to _____

   1. A.
      concentration of resources in a limited number of universities
   2. B.
      compulsory cooperation between universities and industries
   3. C.
      government aid to non-research-oriented universities
   4. D.
      fair distribution of funding for universities and research institutions
4. 4.

   What dose the author suggest research-led universities do?

   1. A.
      Fully use their research to benefit all sectors of society
   2. B.
      Generously share their facilities with those short of funds
   3. C.
      Advertise their research to win international recognition
   4. D.
      Spread their influence among top research institutions

(The Guardian)：              More UK universities should be profiting from ideas
　　A repeated criticism of the UK's university sector is its noticeable weakness in translating new knowledge into new products and services.
　　Recently, the UK National Stem Cell Network warned the UK could lose its place among the world leaders in stem cell research unless adequate funding and legislation could be assured, despite an annual £40m spent by the Department of Health on all kinds of research.
　　However, we do have to challenge the unthinking complaint that the sector does not do enough in taking ideas to market. The most recent comparative data on the performance of universities and research institutions in Australia, Canada, USA and UK shows that, from a relatively weak starting position, the UK now leads on many indicators of commercialization activity.
　　When viewed at the national level, the policy interventions (interference) of the past decade have helped transformed the performances of UK universities. Evidence suggests the UK's position is much stronger than in the recent past and is still showing improvement. But national data masks the very large variation in the performance of individual universities. The evidence shows that a large number of universities have fallen off the back of the pack, a few perform strongly and the rest chase the leaders.
　　This type of uneven distribution is not strange to the UK and is mirrored across other economies. In the UK, research is concentrated: less than 25% of universities are receiving 75% of the research funding. These same universities are also the institutions producing the greatest share of PhD graduates, science citations, patents and license income. The effect of policies generating long-term resource concentration has also created a distinctive set of universities which are research-led and commercially active. It seems clear that the concentration of research and commercialization work creates differences between universities.
　　The core objective for universities which are research-led must be to maximize the impact of their research efforts. Their purpose is not to generate funds to add to the bottom line of the university or to substitute other income streams. Rather, these universities should be generating the widest range of social, economic and environmental benefits. In return for the scale of investment, they should share their expertise (expert knowledge or skill) in order to build greater confidence in the sector.
　　Part of the economic recovery of the UK will be driven by the next generation of research commercialization spilling out of our universities. On the evidence presented in my report, there are three dozen universities in the UK which are actively engaged in advanced research training and commercialization work.
　　If there was a greater coordination（协调）of technology transfer offices within regions and a simultaneous (happening at the same time) investment in the scale and functions of our graduate schools, universities could, and should, play a key role in positioning the UK for the next growth cycle.
【小题1】What does the author think of UK universities in terms of commercialization?