题目内容
Waste to Energy—JUST BURN IT!
WHY BURN WASTE?
Waste-to-energy plants generate (产生) enough electricity to supply 2.4 million households in the US. But, providing electricity is not the major advantage of waste-to-energy plants. In fact, it costs more to generate electricity at a waste-to-energy plant than it does at a coal, nuclear, or hydropower plant.
The major advantage of burning waste is that it considerably reduces the amount of trash going to landfills. The average American produces more than 1,600 pounds of waste a year. If all this waste were landfilled, it would take more than two cubic yards of landfill space. That’s the volume of a box three feet long, three feet wide, and six feet high. If that waste were burned, the ashes would fit into a box three feet long, three feet wide, but only nine inches high!
Some communities in the Northeast may be running out of land for new landfills. And, since most people don’t want landfills in their backyards, it has become more difficult to obtain permits to build new landfills. Taking the country as a whole, the United States has plenty of open space, of course, but it is expensive to transport garbage a long distance to put it into a landfill.
TO BURN OR NOT TO BURN?
Some people are concerned that burning garbage may harm the environment. Like coal plants, waste-to-energy plants produce air pollution when the fuel is burned to produce steam or electricity. Burning garbage releases the chemicals and substances found in the waste. Some chemicals can be a threat to people, the environment, or both, if they are not properly controlled.
Some critics of waste-to-energy plants are afraid that burning waste will hamper (妨碍,阻碍) recycling programs. If everyone sends their trash to a waste-to-energy plant, they say, there will be little motive to recycle. Several states have considered or are considering banning waste-to-energy plants unless recycling programs are in place. Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York City have delayed new waste-to-energy plants, hoping to increase the level of recycling first.
So, what’s the real story? Can recycling and burning waste coexist? At first glance, recycling and waste-to-energy seem to be at odds (不一致), but they can actually complement (弥补) each other. That’s because it makes good sense to recycle some materials, and better sense to burn others.
Let’s look at aluminum, for example. Aluminum mineral is so expensive to mine that recycling aluminum more than pays for itself. Burning it produces no energy. So clearly, aluminum is valuable to recycle and not useful to burn.
Paper, on the other hand, can either be burned or recycled—it all depends on the price the used paper will bring.
Plastics are another matter. Because plastics are made from petroleum and natural gas, they are excellent sources of energy for waste-to-energy plants. This is especially true since plastics are not as easy to recycle as steel, aluminum, or paper. Plastics almost always have to be hand sorted and making a product from recycled plastics may cost more than making it from new materials.
To burn or not to burn is not really the question. We should use both recycling and waste-to-energy as alternatives to landfilling.
Waste to Energy—JUST BURN IT!
| WHY BURN WASTE? | Advantages of waste to Energy | ◆Though at a high (71) _______, waste-to-energy plants can produce enough electricity for 2.4 million US households. ◆Burning waste can (72) _______ a considerable amount of trash going to landfills. |
| (73)_______ for landfilling | ◆Some communities (74) _______ land for new landfills. ◆Most people refuse to build landfills around. ◆Building landfills in far-away areas will increase the cost of (75) _______ garbage. | |
| TO BURN OR NOT TO BURN? | (76) __________ about burning garbage | ◆Burning garbage releases chemicals, which, if not properly controlled, can be (77) _______ to people and the environment. ◆Burning garbage will hamper recycling programs. |
| Coexistence of recycling and burning waste | Recycling and waste-to-energy can go well with each other in that some materials like aluminum are fit to recycle, while others like plastics are fit to (78) _______. | |
| (79)__________ | Whether to burn or not to burn, we should (80) _______ landfilling with both recycling and waste-to-energy to deal with garbage. | |
71. cost 72. reduce / prevent / stop 73. Difficulties 74. lack 75. transporting
76. Concerns / Worries 77. harmful / dangerous 78. burn 79. Conclusion 80. replace
Reduce, reuse, and recycle. This familiar environmentalist slogan tells us how to reduce the amount of rubbish that ends up in landfills and waterways. The concept is being used to deal with one possibly dangerous form of waste — electronic junk (电子垃圾), such as old computers, cell phones, and televisions. But this process for managing e-waste may be used in an unscrupulous way more often than not used, a recent report suggests.
“A lot of these materials are being sent to developing nations under the excuse of reuse — to bridge the digital divide,” said Richard Gutierrez, a policy researcher.
One of the problems is that no one proves whether these old machines work before they hit the seaways. Because of this, the report says, e-waste is a growing problem in Lagos, Nigeria, and elsewhere in the developing world. Much of the waste ends up being thrown away along rivers and roads. Often it’s picked apart by poor people, who may face dangerous exposure to poisonous chemicals in the equipment.
Businessmen also pay workers a little money to get back materials such as gold and copper. This low-tech recovery process could expose workers and the local environment to many dangerous materials used to build electronics. According to Gutierrez, this shadow economy exists because the excuse of recycling and reusing electronics gives businessmen “a green passport” to ship waste around the globe. “Developing nations must take upon some of the responsibility themselves,” Gutierrez said. But, he added, “A greater portion of this responsibility should fall on the exporting state.”
China, for example, has become a dumping place for large amounts of e-waste. The nation is beginning to take action to stop the flow of dangerous materials across its borders. The Chinese government, after many years of denial is finally beginning to take the lead.
【小题1】 The passage mainly tells us that _______.
| A.developing countries are facing serious environmental problems |
| B.e-waste is sent to developing countries under the excuse of reuse |
| C.developing countries are making full use of e-waste |
| D.e-waste is a growing problem in developed countries |
| A.A lot of e-waste is dumped in developing countries. |
| B.Poor people break up e-waste to collect some valuable materials. |
| C.The problem of e-waste is growing in developing countries. |
| D.Old computers and TVs still work before they are sent abroad. |
| A.immoral | B.wrong | C.proud | D.unsafe |
| A.developing countries should be responsible for this problem |
| B.exporting countries should be mainly responsible for this problem |
| C.neither rich nor poor countries should be blamed for this problem |
| D.poor countries should be blamed for this problem |
It was your birthday, and you just opened your biggest gift — a smooth silver laptop. You can’t wait to instant-message your friends with the news, but first you have to get rid of your old desktop computer. Do you just throw away the monitor and keyboard in the trash? Not anymore!
Three states, that is, California, Maine, and Maryland, recently passed laws prohibiting people from throwing away electronic waste, or e-waste, includes televisions, computers, and cell phones. Although they don’t make you sick when you use them, they do when they are destroyed, for they contain heavy metals that can be harmful to human bodies. For example, cell phone batteries contain a kind of chemical causing damage to kidneys and deserted computer monitors can damage brains. And flat TV screens may cause injury to the nervous system. Those metals can leak into the ground or give off pollutants when burned.
It is required that e-waste be placed at special sites rather than usual landfills. Several other states are considering similar laws and California is also pushing for a law banning the application of such dangerous substances.
Government officials are not the only people taking aim at e-waste; environmentalists are also urging people to recycle their outdated equipment.
“It is just a waste … to not recycle,” Patrick, an associate professor of occupational and environmental health at university of Iowa, told The Daily Iowan, “Allowing dangerous chemicals to leak into the environment for decades seems irresponsible.”
What Can You Do?
Reduce. Be a responsible shopper, and take care of your electronics so they will last longer.
Re-use. Donate or sell your old high-tech equipment.
Recycle. To find a responsible recycler, contact a local or state environmental group.
【小题1】What’s the best title of this passage?
| A.E-waste is being made good use of. |
| B.E-waste, a big threat to us. |
| C.E-waste is dangerous to us all the while. |
| D.Goodbye, e-waste. |
| A.Because they can go off at times and threaten us. |
| B.Because they can make people sick, as long as people use them. |
| C.Because they contain poisonous chemical substances. |
| D.Because they take too much space when placed in trashes. |
| A.Waste can’t be recycled. |
| B.Waste can be made use of by recycling |
| C.We have to recycle e-waste to protect the environment. |
| D.Protecting the environment is important. |
| A.Taking care of your electronics so they will last longer. |
| B.Donating or selling your old high-tech equipment. |
| C.Contacting a local or state environmental group. |
| D.Asking fewer people to use electric products. |