2. 考研
  3. The enormous power tucked away in the atomic nucleus, the chemist Frederick Soddy rhapsodised in 1908, could "transform a desert

The enormous power tucked away in the atomic nucleus, the chemist Frederick Soddy rhapsodised in 1908, could "transform a desert

admin2014-06-25  59
问题     The enormous power tucked away in the atomic nucleus, the chemist Frederick Soddy rhapsodised in 1908, could "transform a desert continent, thaw the frozen poles, and make the whole world one smiling Garden of Eden. " Militarily, that power has threatened the opposite, with its ability to make deserts out of gardens on an unparalleled scale. Idealists hoped that, in civil garb, it might redress the balance, providing a cheap, plentiful, reliable and safe source of electricity for centuries to come. But it has not. Nor does it soon seem likely to.
    Looking at nuclear power 26 years ago, The Economist observed that the way forward for a somewhat stagnant nuclear industry was "to get plenty of nuclear plants built, and then to accumulate, a record of no deaths, no serious accidents—and no dispute that the result is cheaper energy. " It was a fair assessment; but the conclusion that the industry was "safe as a chocolate factory" proved something of a hostage to fortune. Less than a month later one of the reactors at the Chernobyl plant in Ukraine ran out of control and exploded.
    Then, 25 years later, when enough time had passed for some to be talking of a "nuclear renais-sance", it happened again. The bureaucrats, politicians and industrialists allowed their enthusiasm for nuclear power to shelter weak regulation, safety systems that failed to work and a blamable ignorance of the constructional risks the reactors faced, all the while blithely promulgating a myth of nuclear safety. In any country independent regulation is harder when the industry being regulated exists largely by government fiat. Yet, without governments private companies would simply not choose to build nuclear-power plants. This is in part because of the risks they face from local opposition and changes in government policy. But it is mostly because reactors are very expensive indeed.
    Nuclear power would be more competitive if it were cheaper. Yet despite generous government re-search-anddevelopment programmes stretching back decades, this does not look likely. Innovation tends to thrive where many designs can compete against each other, where newcomers can get into the game easily, where regulation is light. Some renewable-energy technologies meet these criteria, and are getting cheaper as a result. But there is no obvious way for nuclear power to do so. Proponents say small, mass-produced reactors would avoid some of the problems of today’s big monsters. But for true innovation such reactors would need a large market in which to compete against each other. Such a market does not exist.
    Nuclear innovation is still possible, but it will not happen apace: whales evolve slower than fruit flies. This does not mean nuclear power will suddenly go away. But the promise of a global transformation is gone.
Toward the prospect of nuclear industry 26 years ago, The Economist’s attitude can be said to be______.
选项 A、objective
B、optimistic
C、pessimistic
D、biased
答案B
解析 第二段前两句主体介绍了26年前《经济学人》对核工业的考查，由引号中的文字可以看出《经济学人》之于26年业已停滞不前的核工业的看法是“只要修建大量核电厂，保证无死亡、无严重事故，最后自然会生产出廉价能源，而且核工业安全得像巧克力厂一样”，由此可知，《经济学人》对于26年前核能的前景还是持乐观态度的，[B]选项符合文意。同时排除[C]选项。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.kaotiyun.com/show/6FK4777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)