2. 外语
  3. By the year 2100, global temperatures are anticipated to rise by between 0.8 and 3.5 degree Celsius. That may not seem like much

By the year 2100, global temperatures are anticipated to rise by between 0.8 and 3.5 degree Celsius. That may not seem like much

admin2014-12-11  49
问题     By the year 2100, global temperatures are anticipated to rise by between 0.8 and 3.5 degree Celsius. That may not seem like much, but, such an increase in temperature would cause a rise in sea levels large enough to put the lives of up to 100 million people at risk. (This number will rise as the global population increases.) Widespread flooding, as well as droughts in other areas, could cause migrations as areas become uninhabitable. Tropical diseases would almost certainly spread northwards, causing "wide-ranging and mostly adverse impacts on human health, with significant loss of life".
    For the first time in the scientific community, there is total agreement that the activity of humans is at least partly responsible for the problem — especially the emission of greenhouse gasses like Carbon dioxide, which is released by the burning of wood, coal and petroleum products. Reducing harmful emissions is just one area in which the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel is decidedly optimistic. For one thing, in the short term it might not prove that difficult. Efficiency improvements alone could cut energy needs by as much as 30 percent at virtually no extra cost and, in developed countries, emission reduction of up to 60 percent "are technically feasible". In the longer term, harmful emissions will be reduced as the world changes over to cheaper, less environmentally damaging energy resources.
    So, if it is economically and technically feasible to reduce harmful emissions, why is almost nothing being done? There are two main reasons. The first stems from the uncertainty about how hot the planet is going to get. The current estimate is extremely broad — between 0.8 and 3.5 degree Celsius. If the former prediction is accurate, it may be that we can adapt to it without difficulty. If, on the other hand, the latter is closer to reality, a complete rethink of the world’s energy supplies is already long overdue.
    This leads directly to the second problem — the time scale involved. It is hard to get people to act when predictions may take between 50 and 100 years to materialize. For politicians, who face elections every half decade or so, preventative action against a future threat — the magnitude of which is still very uncertain — carries heavy political risks.
    Even if politicians in the developed world were to be forced into action, what of the developing world, which is economically dependent on fossil fuels? Should it reduce emission, and suffer the consequence, because of mistakes made by the developed world?
    One suggestion is that developing countries be given allowances above the current emission standard. This would enable them to meet their industrialized needs and ultimately help them to finance environmentally sound technologies. This would seem the only realistic way of getting agreement from developing countries — a vital requirement because, if preventive action is going to work, "you really have to have everyone on board".
In the longer span of the future, what is the most important in reducing harmful emissions?
选项 A、Efficiency improvement.
B、New energy resources.
C、New technologies.
D、Burning less fossil fuel.
答案B
解析 事实细节题。第二段尾句讲到：长远来看，有害气体排放的减少有赖于世界使用更廉价、更环保的资源，故答案为[B]。由第二段倒数第二句可知效率的提高只是短期措施，故排除[A]。新技术只有应用到新能源的开发上才能实现减排，故排除[C]。燃烧化石燃料是导致全球气候变暖的其中一个原因，故排除[D]。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.kaotiyun.com/show/6VdO777K
0

专业英语八级

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)