2. 职称英语
  3. The work on atmospheric chlorofluorocarbons(氯氟化碳)led eventually to a global

The work on atmospheric chlorofluorocarbons(氯氟化碳)led eventually to a global

游客2024-02-21  28
问题     The work on atmospheric chlorofluorocarbons(氯氟化碳)led eventually to a global CFC ban that saved us from ozone-layer reduction. Do we have time to do a similar thing with carbon emissions to save ourselves from climate change?
    Not a hope at all. Most of the "green" stuff is very close to a big trick. Carbon trading, with its huge government grants, is just what finance and industry wanted. It’s not going to do a thing about climate change, but it’ll make a lot of money for a lot of people and postpone the moment of reckoning.
    I am not against renewable energy, but to spoil all the decent countryside in the UK with wind farms is driving me mad. It’s absolutely unnecessary, and it takes 2,500 square kilometers to produce a gigawatt (十亿瓦特) — that’s an awful lot of countryside.
    Work to sequester (隔离) CO2 (carbon dioxide) is also a waste of time. It’s a crazy idea — and dangerous. It would take so long and use so much energy that it will not be done.
    And, nuclear power is a way for the UK to solve its energy problems, but it is not a global cure for climate change. It is too late for emissions reduction measures.
    Yet we are not doomed. There is one way we could save ourselves and that is through the massive burial of charcoal (木炭). It would mean farmers turning all their agricultural waste — which contains carbon that the plants have spent the summer sequestering — into charcoal, and burying it in the soil. Then you can start shifting vast quantities of carbon out of the system and pull the CO2 down quite fast.
    What we can do is getting farmers to burn their crop waste at very low oxygen levels to turn it into charcoal, which the farmer then ploughs into the field. A little CO2 is released but the bulk of it gets converted to carbon. You get a few per cent of bio-fuel as an additional product of the burning process, which the farmer can sell. This scheme would need no subsidy (补贴): the farmer would make a profit. This is the one thing we can do that will make a difference. [br] According to the passage, one advantage of the author’s proposal is that______.
选项 A、it can produce charcoal most of which can be used as fuel
B、it doesn’t involve any international cooperation or negotiation
C、it brings extra income to farmers and saves government money
D、it needs no advanced technology or expensive equipment
答案 C
解析 根据题干中的the author’s proposal将本题出处定位到末段。该段首句提到了作者建议的具体做法，倒数第二句提到这一做法的优点，[C]项中的it brings eXtra income to farmers与该句提到的the farmer would makea profit对应，saves government money与need no subsidy对应，故答案为[C]。文中提到在低氧状态下燃烧农作物尾料，将其转变为木炭，在这燃烧过程中，还可以获得少量副产品：生物燃料，[A]中的most与原文的a few per cent矛盾，故排除。[B]、[D]两项在文中均未提及，故排除。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3470639.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)