Text l The outrage surrounding Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from the 2015 Paris Agreement is understandable.But no matter how much the President huffs and puffs,his views will go the way of some of the previous victims of climate change:the dinosaurs.We should not dismiss the measures and targets which the Paris Agreement looked to put in place.Even without the United States,the impact which they have will be pronounced.But the hard truth which the Trump administration will one day face up to is that they have already become marginalised and the future of action to limit the effects of climate change will now come,not from governments,but from the private sector.With this in mind,Trump's attempts to frame the decision to pull out of the Paris Agreement in any sort of economic terms seem flawed.The upside to his decision will be another"big win for the Donald",appealing to his political core.However,on his favourite subject-jobs-the statistics are against him,as the US solar industry now employs nearty twice as many workers as oil,gas and coal combined.In the UK,despite changes in regulation and cuts to subsidies,renewable energy continues to flourish.Solar energy is providing record percentages of power to the National Grid,while on stormier days,North Sea wind farms can now produce over 100 per cent of the energy used in Scotland.Meanwhile,attempts to develop a new shale-gas industry have so far floundered,despite significant government support.The past decade has seen a green energy revolution across the globe.Over 18 per cent of the world's power is now produced from renewable sources and this proportion looks set to rise in the coming years and decades.The growth in renewables has improved the efficiency of these cleaner forms of power,with costs per unit declining and set to fall further still.This growth is being reflected in the value of investments,as markets are already being reshaped as new players enter traditional industries,backed by capital rich private investors seeking sustainable long-term returns.Tesla,the electric vehicle maker founded in 2003,now has a market capitalisation over 20 per cent higher than Ford.It is also telling that the oil price fell after Trump's announcement.In theory oil and coal should have been prime beneficiaries of Trump's decision.Political impetus to act on climate change,through projects like the Paris Agreement,remains relevant.It would undoubtedly have been better if Trump had swallowed his pride and backed away from this decision.Yet when it comes to the future of our climate,it will be the thousands of businesses,millions of jobs and billions of consumers who decide,through the choices,purchases and investments they make,what that future will be.Even the leader of the free world is impotent against that tidal wave.The author holds that Trump's decision will____A.destroy the goals of the Paris AgreementB.reshape governments'role in climate changeC.produce little effect on jobs in the USD.change the pattern of the energy industry
Text l The outrage surrounding Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from the 2015 Paris Agreement is understandable.But no matter how much the President huffs and puffs,his views will go the way of some of the previous victims of climate change:the dinosaurs.We should not dismiss the measures and targets which the Paris Agreement looked to put in place.Even without the United States,the impact which they have will be pronounced.But the hard truth which the Trump administration will one day face up to is that they have already become marginalised and the future of action to limit the effects of climate change will now come,not from governments,but from the private sector.With this in mind,Trump's attempts to frame the decision to pull out of the Paris Agreement in any sort of economic terms seem flawed.The upside to his decision will be another"big win for the Donald",appealing to his political core.However,on his favourite subject-jobs-the statistics are against him,as the US solar industry now employs nearty twice as many workers as oil,gas and coal combined.In the UK,despite changes in regulation and cuts to subsidies,renewable energy continues to flourish.Solar energy is providing record percentages of power to the National Grid,while on stormier days,North Sea wind farms can now produce over 100 per cent of the energy used in Scotland.Meanwhile,attempts to develop a new shale-gas industry have so far floundered,despite significant government support.The past decade has seen a green energy revolution across the globe.Over 18 per cent of the world's power is now produced from renewable sources and this proportion looks set to rise in the coming years and decades.The growth in renewables has improved the efficiency of these cleaner forms of power,with costs per unit declining and set to fall further still.This growth is being reflected in the value of investments,as markets are already being reshaped as new players enter traditional industries,backed by capital rich private investors seeking sustainable long-term returns.Tesla,the electric vehicle maker founded in 2003,now has a market capitalisation over 20 per cent higher than Ford.It is also telling that the oil price fell after Trump's announcement.In theory oil and coal should have been prime beneficiaries of Trump's decision.Political impetus to act on climate change,through projects like the Paris Agreement,remains relevant.It would undoubtedly have been better if Trump had swallowed his pride and backed away from this decision.Yet when it comes to the future of our climate,it will be the thousands of businesses,millions of jobs and billions of consumers who decide,through the choices,purchases and investments they make,what that future will be.Even the leader of the free world is impotent against that tidal wave.
The author holds that Trump's decision will____
The author holds that Trump's decision will____
A.destroy the goals of the Paris Agreement
B.reshape governments'role in climate change
C.produce little effect on jobs in the US
D.change the pattern of the energy industry
B.reshape governments'role in climate change
C.produce little effect on jobs in the US
D.change the pattern of the energy industry
参考解析
解析：[信息锁定]第三段首句指出特朗普退出巴黎协定的经济借口有缺陷（flawed）。随后给出解释：就业统计数据（太阳能行业的就业人数已远超石油、煤炭等的总合）与特朗普的预期（即：退出巴黎协定会改善石油、煤炭等产业的就业）相悖。可见作者认为退出巴黎协定对于美国的就业影响甚微．C.正确。[解题技巧]A.与第二段①②句相悖：文中指出，即便没有美国，巴黎协定的措施及目标也会产生显著影响。B.曲解第二段③句语义：该句指出未来应对气候变化的希望将源于私营部门，而非政府（言外之意为：政府对气候的未来影响很小，特朗普的决定不会引发多大改变）。D.曲解第三段末句所述情形的功用：作者用其说明“现实情形与特朗普预期相悖”，并非“特朗普的决定改变了能源业的格局”。
相关考题：
How did he make his way out in the end?A. The vice-president found him.B. Some one opened the elevator.C. The elevator began to work on Tuesday.D. He found a door in the elevator.
Charles thinks that nowadays running a small shop becomes increasingly difficult ______.A．so his shop will surely go bankruptB．but his shop will surely make good moneyC．and the only way to save his shop is to change the governmentD．because it's hard to keep up with the rising cost
听力原文：M: Would you please tell me what I should do to have funds transferred to me here from London?W: The fastest way is by telegraphic transfer from your bank in London to us.Q: What does the man want to do?(20)A．He wants to withdraw some pounds.B．He wants to transfer some money to London.C．He wants to know how to transfer money from London to him.D．He wants to exchange some pounds for yen.
Cesar Ritz's decision to open The Rize Hotel in1898 was wise because____.A. He had already got fame in Europe，and his fame could help him succeedB. His decision complied with people's wish at that timeC. Paris was the center of fashion in the worldD. French had good taste for food,and The Rize Hotel in Paris could enjoy a good marke
NRA members have branded Donald Trump's plans for stricter gun control legislation“stupid”And a“betrayal”after the president suggested reforms on Wednesday.In an open meeting with congressional Democrats and Republicans,Trump embraced raising the age limit on purchasing certain weapons and suggested that law enforcement should be allowed to confiscate people's guns before going through due process in a court During the meeting Trump called for a beautiful"bill which would expand background checks on gun purchases and restrict young people from purchasing certain weapons.But it was his suggestion that in some cases law enforcement should be allowed to"take the guns first,go through due process second"that most alarmed gun owners on the right Dave Kopel,a benefactor member of the NRA-the highest level of membership--was also'scathing.He referred to past allegations of romantic infidelity and nefarious business practices against Trump.It is not exactly shocking when he betrays the people who elected him,he said The NRA leadership,which has generally supported Trump,and spent more than 30m helping get him elected,tentatively pushed back against the president on Wednesday night."I thought it made for really good TV but I thought some of what was discussed is going to make for really bad policy,"the NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch told Fox News We're talking about punishing innocent Americans and stripping from them constitutional rights without due process,Loesch said The NRA is going to protect due process for innocent Americans and that is an approach that we're going to hold to.Due process must be respected."Robert McBride,a member of the NrA from Roscoe,Texas,said he was also troubled by Trumps idea to take away guns before a court ruling McBride said the plan would violate the fifth and fourteenth amendments to the constitution,which safeguard"life,liberty or property.Without those two amendments the government could just lock you up and throw away the key because some bureaucrat had a bad day or did not like the way you spoke to him.”Mc Bride said He was skeptical of Trump's advocating higher age restrictions for buying some guns.Twenty-one is not a magic age and if that's the bar for obtaining your second amendment right here in america then that should also be the bar for being put on trial as an adult,going to prison as an adult,enlisting in our armed services and voting in our elections.”What is the passage mainly about?A.Donald Trump plans to restrict purchasing and using guns.B.NRA strongly opposes the president's gun control billC.President Trump's gun control policies clash with NRAD.Donald Trumps'plan violates American constitutional treaty
Text 1 Giant corporations often claim to be"green,"pointing to programs they've undertaken aimed at being environmentally conscious.But sometimes these efforts don't really amount to much.They can be no more than'igrcenwashing,"a public relations effort that doesn't represent any fundamental shift in thinking.But such a change may actually be going on among several of the world's largest fossil fuel companies,namcs such as ExxonMobil,Shell,and BP.One of the biggest reasons:pressure from the companies'sharcholdcrs.Investors arc asking corporations to make more transparent the effects climate change will have on their businesses,as well as explain what they are doing to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.While sharcholdcr motivcs are cerlainly aimed at helping in the worldwide fight against global warming,they also represent a practical need to better understand a company's prospects.If the burning of oil and gas is grcaily curtailed as a result of the December 2015 intemational Paris climate agreement,for example,how might that affect the bottom line of a corporation whose chief source of revenue is extracting and selling carbon-emitting oil and gas?Or,conversely,how is a company planning to take advantage of the business opportunities that emerge from a shift away from fossil fuels?Climate Action 100+,for example,is a shareholder action group that is asking corporations to make stronger commitments to meeting the 80 percent cut in carbon emissions proposed by the Paris agreement signed two years ago by nearly 200 nations.Some 225 investment groups who manage more than S26.3 trillion have signed on in support.Last week,intemational energy giant ExxonMobil said it will step up its reporting to shareholders and the public about the impacts climate change will have on its business,including any expected increased risks.The new policy follows a vote by ExxonMobil investors at the company's annual meeting in May that called for a yearly assessment of the effects of climate change on the company.The new position represents a sea change for ExxonMobil,which until the early 2000s had disputed the need to take action on climate change.Around the world national govemments are shaping new policies in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to a level that will not allow global temperatures to rise more than 2 degrees Celsius.In the U,S.,individual states and cities are pursuing lawsuits against companies that fail to deal responsibly with greenhouse gas emissions,which they contend harm the public.22.Which of the following is right about shareholders?A.They explained their steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.B.They are reluctant to help fight against global warming.C.They have made some corporations'thought changed.D.They pointed out their understanding of companies'prospects.
Text 1 Giant corporations often claim to be"green,"pointing to programs they've undertaken aimed at being environmentally conscious.But sometimes these efforts don't really amount to much.They can be no more than'igrcenwashing,"a public relations effort that doesn't represent any fundamental shift in thinking.But such a change may actually be going on among several of the world's largest fossil fuel companies,namcs such as ExxonMobil,Shell,and BP.One of the biggest reasons:pressure from the companies'sharcholdcrs.Investors arc asking corporations to make more transparent the effects climate change will have on their businesses,as well as explain what they are doing to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.While sharcholdcr motivcs are cerlainly aimed at helping in the worldwide fight against global warming,they also represent a practical need to better understand a company's prospects.If the burning of oil and gas is grcaily curtailed as a result of the December 2015 intemational Paris climate agreement,for example,how might that affect the bottom line of a corporation whose chief source of revenue is extracting and selling carbon-emitting oil and gas?Or,conversely,how is a company planning to take advantage of the business opportunities that emerge from a shift away from fossil fuels?Climate Action 100+,for example,is a shareholder action group that is asking corporations to make stronger commitments to meeting the 80 percent cut in carbon emissions proposed by the Paris agreement signed two years ago by nearly 200 nations.Some 225 investment groups who manage more than S26.3 trillion have signed on in support.Last week,intemational energy giant ExxonMobil said it will step up its reporting to shareholders and the public about the impacts climate change will have on its business,including any expected increased risks.The new policy follows a vote by ExxonMobil investors at the company's annual meeting in May that called for a yearly assessment of the effects of climate change on the company.The new position represents a sea change for ExxonMobil,which until the early 2000s had disputed the need to take action on climate change.Around the world national govemments are shaping new policies in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to a level that will not allow global temperatures to rise more than 2 degrees Celsius.In the U,S.,individual states and cities are pursuing lawsuits against companies that fail to deal responsibly with greenhouse gas emissions,which they contend harm the public.24.What's ExxonMobil's attitude toward taking action on climate change?A.Biased.B.Objective.C.Indifferent.D.Supportive.
Text 1 Giant corporations often claim to be"green,"pointing to programs they've undertaken aimed at being environmentally conscious.But sometimes these efforts don't really amount to much.They can be no more than'igrcenwashing,"a public relations effort that doesn't represent any fundamental shift in thinking.But such a change may actually be going on among several of the world's largest fossil fuel companies,namcs such as ExxonMobil,Shell,and BP.One of the biggest reasons:pressure from the companies'sharcholdcrs.Investors arc asking corporations to make more transparent the effects climate change will have on their businesses,as well as explain what they are doing to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.While sharcholdcr motivcs are cerlainly aimed at helping in the worldwide fight against global warming,they also represent a practical need to better understand a company's prospects.If the burning of oil and gas is grcaily curtailed as a result of the December 2015 intemational Paris climate agreement,for example,how might that affect the bottom line of a corporation whose chief source of revenue is extracting and selling carbon-emitting oil and gas?Or,conversely,how is a company planning to take advantage of the business opportunities that emerge from a shift away from fossil fuels?Climate Action 100+,for example,is a shareholder action group that is asking corporations to make stronger commitments to meeting the 80 percent cut in carbon emissions proposed by the Paris agreement signed two years ago by nearly 200 nations.Some 225 investment groups who manage more than S26.3 trillion have signed on in support.Last week,intemational energy giant ExxonMobil said it will step up its reporting to shareholders and the public about the impacts climate change will have on its business,including any expected increased risks.The new policy follows a vote by ExxonMobil investors at the company's annual meeting in May that called for a yearly assessment of the effects of climate change on the company.The new position represents a sea change for ExxonMobil,which until the early 2000s had disputed the need to take action on climate change.Around the world national govemments are shaping new policies in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to a level that will not allow global temperatures to rise more than 2 degrees Celsius.In the U,S.,individual states and cities are pursuing lawsuits against companies that fail to deal responsibly with greenhouse gas emissions,which they contend harm the public.23.The word"curtailed"（Para.3）most probably meansA.limited.B.forbidden.C.improved.D.affected.
NRA members have branded Donald Trump's plans for stricter gun control legislation“stupid”And a“betrayal”after the president suggested reforms on Wednesday.In an open meeting with congressional Democrats and Republicans,Trump embraced raising the age limit on purchasing certain weapons and suggested that law enforcement should be allowed to confiscate people's guns before going through due process in a court During the meeting Trump called for a beautiful"bill which would expand background checks on gun purchases and restrict young people from purchasing certain weapons.But it was his suggestion that in some cases law enforcement should be allowed to"take the guns first,go through due process second"that most alarmed gun owners on the right Dave Kopel,a benefactor member of the NRA-the highest level of membership--was also'scathing.He referred to past allegations of romantic infidelity and nefarious business practices against Trump.It is not exactly shocking when he betrays the people who elected him,he said The NRA leadership,which has generally supported Trump,and spent more than 30m helping get him elected,tentatively pushed back against the president on Wednesday night."I thought it made for really good TV but I thought some of what was discussed is going to make for really bad policy,"the NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch told Fox News We're talking about punishing innocent Americans and stripping from them constitutional rights without due process,Loesch said The NRA is going to protect due process for innocent Americans and that is an approach that we're going to hold to.Due process must be respected."Robert McBride,a member of the NrA from Roscoe,Texas,said he was also troubled by Trumps idea to take away guns before a court ruling McBride said the plan would violate the fifth and fourteenth amendments to the constitution,which safeguard"life,liberty or property.Without those two amendments the government could just lock you up and throw away the key because some bureaucrat had a bad day or did not like the way you spoke to him.”Mc Bride said He was skeptical of Trump's advocating higher age restrictions for buying some guns.Twenty-one is not a magic age and if that's the bar for obtaining your second amendment right here in america then that should also be the bar for being put on trial as an adult,going to prison as an adult,enlisting in our armed services and voting in our elections.”How does Dana Loesch think of President Trump?A.She believes Trump has betrayed his previous promiseB.She believes Trump deprived people's legal rightsC.She believes Trump tentatively opposes the NRA supportD.She believes Trump is good at TV and Twitter show
NRA members have branded Donald Trump's plans for stricter gun control legislation“stupid”And a“betrayal”after the president suggested reforms on Wednesday.In an open meeting with congressional Democrats and Republicans,Trump embraced raising the age limit on purchasing certain weapons and suggested that law enforcement should be allowed to confiscate people's guns before going through due process in a court During the meeting Trump called for a beautiful"bill which would expand background checks on gun purchases and restrict young people from purchasing certain weapons.But it was his suggestion that in some cases law enforcement should be allowed to"take the guns first,go through due process second"that most alarmed gun owners on the right Dave Kopel,a benefactor member of the NRA-the highest level of membership--was also'scathing.He referred to past allegations of romantic infidelity and nefarious business practices against Trump.It is not exactly shocking when he betrays the people who elected him,he said The NRA leadership,which has generally supported Trump,and spent more than 30m helping get him elected,tentatively pushed back against the president on Wednesday night."I thought it made for really good TV but I thought some of what was discussed is going to make for really bad policy,"the NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch told Fox News We're talking about punishing innocent Americans and stripping from them constitutional rights without due process,Loesch said The NRA is going to protect due process for innocent Americans and that is an approach that we're going to hold to.Due process must be respected."Robert McBride,a member of the NrA from Roscoe,Texas,said he was also troubled by Trumps idea to take away guns before a court ruling McBride said the plan would violate the fifth and fourteenth amendments to the constitution,which safeguard"life,liberty or property.Without those two amendments the government could just lock you up and throw away the key because some bureaucrat had a bad day or did not like the way you spoke to him.”Mc Bride said He was skeptical of Trump's advocating higher age restrictions for buying some guns.Twenty-one is not a magic age and if that's the bar for obtaining your second amendment right here in america then that should also be the bar for being put on trial as an adult,going to prison as an adult,enlisting in our armed services and voting in our elections.”NRA members view Donald Trump's plan for gun control withA.disapprovalB.toleranceC.skepticismD.uncertainty
Text 1 Giant corporations often claim to be"green,"pointing to programs they've undertaken aimed at being environmentally conscious.But sometimes these efforts don't really amount to much.They can be no more than'igrcenwashing,"a public relations effort that doesn't represent any fundamental shift in thinking.But such a change may actually be going on among several of the world's largest fossil fuel companies,namcs such as ExxonMobil,Shell,and BP.One of the biggest reasons:pressure from the companies'sharcholdcrs.Investors arc asking corporations to make more transparent the effects climate change will have on their businesses,as well as explain what they are doing to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.While sharcholdcr motivcs are cerlainly aimed at helping in the worldwide fight against global warming,they also represent a practical need to better understand a company's prospects.If the burning of oil and gas is grcaily curtailed as a result of the December 2015 intemational Paris climate agreement,for example,how might that affect the bottom line of a corporation whose chief source of revenue is extracting and selling carbon-emitting oil and gas?Or,conversely,how is a company planning to take advantage of the business opportunities that emerge from a shift away from fossil fuels?Climate Action 100+,for example,is a shareholder action group that is asking corporations to make stronger commitments to meeting the 80 percent cut in carbon emissions proposed by the Paris agreement signed two years ago by nearly 200 nations.Some 225 investment groups who manage more than S26.3 trillion have signed on in support.Last week,intemational energy giant ExxonMobil said it will step up its reporting to shareholders and the public about the impacts climate change will have on its business,including any expected increased risks.The new policy follows a vote by ExxonMobil investors at the company's annual meeting in May that called for a yearly assessment of the effects of climate change on the company.The new position represents a sea change for ExxonMobil,which until the early 2000s had disputed the need to take action on climate change.Around the world national govemments are shaping new policies in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to a level that will not allow global temperatures to rise more than 2 degrees Celsius.In the U,S.,individual states and cities are pursuing lawsuits against companies that fail to deal responsibly with greenhouse gas emissions,which they contend harm the public.25.The U.S.is quoted to indicateA.its great achievement in dealing with climate change.B.greenhouse gas emissions have been under control.C.countries are striving to cope with climate change.D.it has rules and laws against greenhouse gas emissions
NRA members have branded Donald Trump's plans for stricter gun control legislation“stupid”And a“betrayal”after the president suggested reforms on Wednesday.In an open meeting with congressional Democrats and Republicans,Trump embraced raising the age limit on purchasing certain weapons and suggested that law enforcement should be allowed to confiscate people's guns before going through due process in a court During the meeting Trump called for a beautiful"bill which would expand background checks on gun purchases and restrict young people from purchasing certain weapons.But it was his suggestion that in some cases law enforcement should be allowed to"take the guns first,go through due process second"that most alarmed gun owners on the right Dave Kopel,a benefactor member of the NRA-the highest level of membership--was also'scathing.He referred to past allegations of romantic infidelity and nefarious business practices against Trump.It is not exactly shocking when he betrays the people who elected him,he said The NRA leadership,which has generally supported Trump,and spent more than 30m helping get him elected,tentatively pushed back against the president on Wednesday night."I thought it made for really good TV but I thought some of what was discussed is going to make for really bad policy,"the NRA spokeswoman Dana Loesch told Fox News We're talking about punishing innocent Americans and stripping from them constitutional rights without due process,Loesch said The NRA is going to protect due process for innocent Americans and that is an approach that we're going to hold to.Due process must be respected."Robert McBride,a member of the NrA from Roscoe,Texas,said he was also troubled by Trumps idea to take away guns before a court ruling McBride said the plan would violate the fifth and fourteenth amendments to the constitution,which safeguard"life,liberty or property.Without those two amendments the government could just lock you up and throw away the key because some bureaucrat had a bad day or did not like the way you spoke to him.”Mc Bride said He was skeptical of Trump's advocating higher age restrictions for buying some guns.Twenty-one is not a magic age and if that's the bar for obtaining your second amendment right here in america then that should also be the bar for being put on trial as an adult,going to prison as an adult,enlisting in our armed services and voting in our elections.”The expression scathing"（Line 2,Para.4）is closest in meaning toA.reproachfulB.detachedC.consentedD.appreciated
Text 1 Giant corporations often claim to be"green,"pointing to programs they've undertaken aimed at being environmentally conscious.But sometimes these efforts don't really amount to much.They can be no more than'igrcenwashing,"a public relations effort that doesn't represent any fundamental shift in thinking.But such a change may actually be going on among several of the world's largest fossil fuel companies,namcs such as ExxonMobil,Shell,and BP.One of the biggest reasons:pressure from the companies'sharcholdcrs.Investors arc asking corporations to make more transparent the effects climate change will have on their businesses,as well as explain what they are doing to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.While sharcholdcr motivcs are cerlainly aimed at helping in the worldwide fight against global warming,they also represent a practical need to better understand a company's prospects.If the burning of oil and gas is grcaily curtailed as a result of the December 2015 intemational Paris climate agreement,for example,how might that affect the bottom line of a corporation whose chief source of revenue is extracting and selling carbon-emitting oil and gas?Or,conversely,how is a company planning to take advantage of the business opportunities that emerge from a shift away from fossil fuels?Climate Action 100+,for example,is a shareholder action group that is asking corporations to make stronger commitments to meeting the 80 percent cut in carbon emissions proposed by the Paris agreement signed two years ago by nearly 200 nations.Some 225 investment groups who manage more than S26.3 trillion have signed on in support.Last week,intemational energy giant ExxonMobil said it will step up its reporting to shareholders and the public about the impacts climate change will have on its business,including any expected increased risks.The new policy follows a vote by ExxonMobil investors at the company's annual meeting in May that called for a yearly assessment of the effects of climate change on the company.The new position represents a sea change for ExxonMobil,which until the early 2000s had disputed the need to take action on climate change.Around the world national govemments are shaping new policies in an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to a level that will not allow global temperatures to rise more than 2 degrees Celsius.In the U,S.,individual states and cities are pursuing lawsuits against companies that fail to deal responsibly with greenhouse gas emissions,which they contend harm the public.21.Big corporations are far away from"green"becauseA.they rarely do anything meaningful.B.they don't have any fundamental shift.C.they have poor public relations.D.they lack fundamental changes in thinking
Questions 184-188 refer to the following article.President Barack Obama has issued his call to put global warming at the top of the internationalagenda, pledging to push for coordinated action by the world's biggest countries to tackle problem of climate change.In the speech, the US president on Tuesday laid out a three-pan plan to deal with climate change using the power of his office.He outlined a strategy to cut the US's carbon pollution by reducing emissions from coal-fired power plants; to prepare the US for the impact of climate change, suchas the super storm that ravaged the New Jersey coastline last year, and to lead the world by example in combating changing climate."While no single step can reverse the effects of climate change, the president believes we have a moral obligation to our kids to leave them a planet that's not polluted and White House official said.The coal industry said the proposals could prove devastating-----shares in US coal mining companies have been falling sharply-but Mr. Obama ' s speech was being watched closely around the world.In Europe, where the Eurozone crisis has pushed theclimate change agenda firmly into the political background, environmental campaigners said they hoped Mr.Obama's speech would puncture arguments tackling global warming as bad for the economy.”If you have got the US and China moving, then the argument that the EU is going it alone clearly doesn't stand up to scrutiny anymore," said Tom Brookes of the European Climate Foundation.The president said he would seek to expand new and existing international initiatives,including bilateral initiatives with China, India and other big emissions countries.According to the passage, what was the possible solution for the problem?A. Seeking international coordination of big emission countriesB. Making EU 's action ahead of environment campaignersC. Enhanced awareness of environmental campaignersD. Expanding the influence of some Asian countries
Questions 184-188 refer to the following article.President Barack Obama has issued his call to put global warming at the top of the internationalagenda, pledging to push for coordinated action by the world's biggest countries to tackle problem of climate change.In the speech, the US president on Tuesday laid out a three-pan plan to deal with climate change using the power of his office.He outlined a strategy to cut the US's carbon pollution by reducing emissions from coal-fired power plants; to prepare the US for the impact of climate change, suchas the super storm that ravaged the New Jersey coastline last year, and to lead the world by example in combating changing climate."While no single step can reverse the effects of climate change, the president believes we have a moral obligation to our kids to leave them a planet that's not polluted and White House official said.The coal industry said the proposals could prove devastating-----shares in US coal mining companies have been falling sharply-but Mr. Obama ' s speech was being watched closely around the world.In Europe, where the Eurozone crisis has pushed theclimate change agenda firmly into the political background, environmental campaigners said they hoped Mr.Obama's speech would puncture arguments tackling global warming as bad for the economy.”If you have got the US and China moving, then the argument that the EU is going it alone clearly doesn't stand up to scrutiny anymore," said Tom Brookes of the European Climate Foundation.The president said he would seek to expand new and existing international initiatives,including bilateral initiatives with China, India and other big emissions countries.The Eurozone crisis has caused that_______A. People believed that dealing with environmental problems is bad for the economyB. There has been more environmental campaigners discussing about the issueC. The climate change agenda was influenced by politicsD. The EU was going along with US and China
Questions 184-188 refer to the following article.President Barack Obama has issued his call to put global warming at the top of the internationalagenda, pledging to push for coordinated action by the world's biggest countries to tackle problem of climate change.In the speech, the US president on Tuesday laid out a three-pan plan to deal with climate change using the power of his office.He outlined a strategy to cut the US's carbon pollution by reducing emissions from coal-fired power plants; to prepare the US for the impact of climate change, suchas the super storm that ravaged the New Jersey coastline last year, and to lead the world by example in combating changing climate."While no single step can reverse the effects of climate change, the president believes we have a moral obligation to our kids to leave them a planet that's not polluted and White House official said.The coal industry said the proposals could prove devastating-----shares in US coal mining companies have been falling sharply-but Mr. Obama ' s speech was being watched closely around the world.In Europe, where the Eurozone crisis has pushed theclimate change agenda firmly into the political background, environmental campaigners said they hoped Mr.Obama's speech would puncture arguments tackling global warming as bad for the economy.”If you have got the US and China moving, then the argument that the EU is going it alone clearly doesn't stand up to scrutiny anymore," said Tom Brookes of the European Climate Foundation.The president said he would seek to expand new and existing international initiatives,including bilateral initiatives with China, India and other big emissions countries.According to the passage, it can be implied that the coal industry______A. was indifferent about the proposalB. agreed with the proposalC. would express opinions after close watchingD. disagreed with the proposal
Questions 184-188 refer to the following article.President Barack Obama has issued his call to put global warming at the top of the internationalagenda, pledging to push for coordinated action by the world's biggest countries to tackle problem of climate change.In the speech, the US president on Tuesday laid out a three-pan plan to deal with climate change using the power of his office.He outlined a strategy to cut the US's carbon pollution by reducing emissions from coal-fired power plants; to prepare the US for the impact of climate change, suchas the super storm that ravaged the New Jersey coastline last year, and to lead the world by example in combating changing climate."While no single step can reverse the effects of climate change, the president believes we have a moral obligation to our kids to leave them a planet that's not polluted and White House official said.The coal industry said the proposals could prove devastating-----shares in US coal mining companies have been falling sharply-but Mr. Obama ' s speech was being watched closely around the world.In Europe, where the Eurozone crisis has pushed theclimate change agenda firmly into the political background, environmental campaigners said they hoped Mr.Obama's speech would puncture arguments tackling global warming as bad for the economy.”If you have got the US and China moving, then the argument that the EU is going it alone clearly doesn't stand up to scrutiny anymore," said Tom Brookes of the European Climate Foundation.The president said he would seek to expand new and existing international initiatives,including bilateral initiatives with China, India and other big emissions countries.Which of the following is NOT included in the US president 's strategy?A. to set a good example for the worldB. to fight against the super storm in the New JerseyC. to cut emissions from coal-fired power plantsD. to prepare the US for the influence of the changing climate
Questions 184-188 refer to the following article.President Barack Obama has issued his call to put global warming at the top of the internationalagenda, pledging to push for coordinated action by the world's biggest countries to tackle problem of climate change.In the speech, the US president on Tuesday laid out a three-pan plan to deal with climate change using the power of his office.He outlined a strategy to cut the US's carbon pollution by reducing emissions from coal-fired power plants; to prepare the US for the impact of climate change, suchas the super storm that ravaged the New Jersey coastline last year, and to lead the world by example in combating changing climate."While no single step can reverse the effects of climate change, the president believes we have a moral obligation to our kids to leave them a planet that's not polluted and White House official said.The coal industry said the proposals could prove devastating-----shares in US coal mining companies have been falling sharply-but Mr. Obama ' s speech was being watched closely around the world.In Europe, where the Eurozone crisis has pushed theclimate change agenda firmly into the political background, environmental campaigners said they hoped Mr.Obama's speech would puncture arguments tackling global warming as bad for the economy.”If you have got the US and China moving, then the argument that the EU is going it alone clearly doesn't stand up to scrutiny anymore," said Tom Brookes of the European Climate Foundation.The president said he would seek to expand new and existing international initiatives,including bilateral initiatives with China, India and other big emissions countries.What was the main point of Obama ' s speech?A. to call for actions to tackle the problems of climate changeB. to co-ordinate for the implementation of international agendaC. to lay out a plan for environmental problemsD. to find reasons for recent global warming
Text l The outrage surrounding Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from the 2015 Paris Agreement is understandable.But no matter how much the President huffs and puffs,his views will go the way of some of the previous victims of climate change:the dinosaurs.We should not dismiss the measures and targets which the Paris Agreement looked to put in place.Even without the United States,the impact which they have will be pronounced.But the hard truth which the Trump administration will one day face up to is that they have already become marginalised and the future of action to limit the effects of climate change will now come,not from governments,but from the private sector.With this in mind,Trump's attempts to frame the decision to pull out of the Paris Agreement in any sort of economic terms seem flawed.The upside to his decision will be another"big win for the Donald",appealing to his political core.However,on his favourite subject-jobs-the statistics are against him,as the US solar industry now employs nearty twice as many workers as oil,gas and coal combined.In the UK,despite changes in regulation and cuts to subsidies,renewable energy continues to flourish.Solar energy is providing record percentages of power to the National Grid,while on stormier days,North Sea wind farms can now produce over 100 per cent of the energy used in Scotland.Meanwhile,attempts to develop a new shale-gas industry have so far floundered,despite significant government support.The past decade has seen a green energy revolution across the globe.Over 18 per cent of the world's power is now produced from renewable sources and this proportion looks set to rise in the coming years and decades.The growth in renewables has improved the efficiency of these cleaner forms of power,with costs per unit declining and set to fall further still.This growth is being reflected in the value of investments,as markets are already being reshaped as new players enter traditional industries,backed by capital rich private investors seeking sustainable long-term returns.Tesla,the electric vehicle maker founded in 2003,now has a market capitalisation over 20 per cent higher than Ford.It is also telling that the oil price fell after Trump's announcement.In theory oil and coal should have been prime beneficiaries of Trump's decision.Political impetus to act on climate change,through projects like the Paris Agreement,remains relevant.It would undoubtedly have been better if Trump had swallowed his pride and backed away from this decision.Yet when it comes to the future of our climate,it will be the thousands of businesses,millions of jobs and billions of consumers who decide,through the choices,purchases and investments they make,what that future will be.Even the leader of the free world is impotent against that tidal wave.The word"floundered"（Line 5,Para.4）is closest in meaning to______A.been in lack of investmentB.been increasingly prosperousC.been under public attackD.been in danger of failrng
Text l The outrage surrounding Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from the 2015 Paris Agreement is understandable.But no matter how much the President huffs and puffs,his views will go the way of some of the previous victims of climate change:the dinosaurs.We should not dismiss the measures and targets which the Paris Agreement looked to put in place.Even without the United States,the impact which they have will be pronounced.But the hard truth which the Trump administration will one day face up to is that they have already become marginalised and the future of action to limit the effects of climate change will now come,not from governments,but from the private sector.With this in mind,Trump's attempts to frame the decision to pull out of the Paris Agreement in any sort of economic terms seem flawed.The upside to his decision will be another"big win for the Donald",appealing to his political core.However,on his favourite subject-jobs-the statistics are against him,as the US solar industry now employs nearty twice as many workers as oil,gas and coal combined.In the UK,despite changes in regulation and cuts to subsidies,renewable energy continues to flourish.Solar energy is providing record percentages of power to the National Grid,while on stormier days,North Sea wind farms can now produce over 100 per cent of the energy used in Scotland.Meanwhile,attempts to develop a new shale-gas industry have so far floundered,despite significant government support.The past decade has seen a green energy revolution across the globe.Over 18 per cent of the world's power is now produced from renewable sources and this proportion looks set to rise in the coming years and decades.The growth in renewables has improved the efficiency of these cleaner forms of power,with costs per unit declining and set to fall further still.This growth is being reflected in the value of investments,as markets are already being reshaped as new players enter traditional industries,backed by capital rich private investors seeking sustainable long-term returns.Tesla,the electric vehicle maker founded in 2003,now has a market capitalisation over 20 per cent higher than Ford.It is also telling that the oil price fell after Trump's announcement.In theory oil and coal should have been prime beneficiaries of Trump's decision.Political impetus to act on climate change,through projects like the Paris Agreement,remains relevant.It would undoubtedly have been better if Trump had swallowed his pride and backed away from this decision.Yet when it comes to the future of our climate,it will be the thousands of businesses,millions of jobs and billions of consumers who decide,through the choices,purchases and investments they make,what that future will be.Even the leader of the free world is impotent against that tidal wave.The future of our climate fundamentally depends on_____A.market powerB.government policiesC.individual moralityD.international projects
Text l The outrage surrounding Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from the 2015 Paris Agreement is understandable.But no matter how much the President huffs and puffs,his views will go the way of some of the previous victims of climate change:the dinosaurs.We should not dismiss the measures and targets which the Paris Agreement looked to put in place.Even without the United States,the impact which they have will be pronounced.But the hard truth which the Trump administration will one day face up to is that they have already become marginalised and the future of action to limit the effects of climate change will now come,not from governments,but from the private sector.With this in mind,Trump's attempts to frame the decision to pull out of the Paris Agreement in any sort of economic terms seem flawed.The upside to his decision will be another"big win for the Donald",appealing to his political core.However,on his favourite subject-jobs-the statistics are against him,as the US solar industry now employs nearty twice as many workers as oil,gas and coal combined.In the UK,despite changes in regulation and cuts to subsidies,renewable energy continues to flourish.Solar energy is providing record percentages of power to the National Grid,while on stormier days,North Sea wind farms can now produce over 100 per cent of the energy used in Scotland.Meanwhile,attempts to develop a new shale-gas industry have so far floundered,despite significant government support.The past decade has seen a green energy revolution across the globe.Over 18 per cent of the world's power is now produced from renewable sources and this proportion looks set to rise in the coming years and decades.The growth in renewables has improved the efficiency of these cleaner forms of power,with costs per unit declining and set to fall further still.This growth is being reflected in the value of investments,as markets are already being reshaped as new players enter traditional industries,backed by capital rich private investors seeking sustainable long-term returns.Tesla,the electric vehicle maker founded in 2003,now has a market capitalisation over 20 per cent higher than Ford.It is also telling that the oil price fell after Trump's announcement.In theory oil and coal should have been prime beneficiaries of Trump's decision.Political impetus to act on climate change,through projects like the Paris Agreement,remains relevant.It would undoubtedly have been better if Trump had swallowed his pride and backed away from this decision.Yet when it comes to the future of our climate,it will be the thousands of businesses,millions of jobs and billions of consumers who decide,through the choices,purchases and investments they make,what that future will be.Even the leader of the free world is impotent against that tidal wave.Which of the following would be the most appropriate title for the text?A.Renewables Are Defeating Fossil Fuels.B.Trump's Decision Triggers Public Outrage.C.Markets Will Tackle Climate Change,with or without Trump.D.The Paris Agreement Will Take Effect,in Spite of Trump's Quit.
资料：Earlier this month, presidents Barack Obama of the US and Xi Jinping of China made an important symbolic gesture when they committed their countries, the two largest greenhouse gas emitters, to the Paris climate agreement. It was the clearest signal yet to investors worldwide that they need to think about the implications of global warming for their portfolios.On Friday afternoon there was an example of what that might mean Mr Obama’s administration issued an order temporarily blocking construction on a section of the Dakota Access oil pipeline. The move was a response to local concerns raised by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe about potential damage to historic sites and the threats of oil spills. But it is the global issue of climate change that had raised the profile of Dakota Access, making it into a cause celebre for US environmental campaigners. Bill McKibben of 350.org, which played a key role in the successful effort to stop the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada, has suggested that Mr Obama could block Dakota Access permanently, on the grounds that it would exacerbate the threat of climate change.Last month, the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality issued new guidance for federal agencies, making clear that their decisions should take into account “the potential effects of a proposed action on climate change”, and quantify their consequences for greenhouse gas emissions. Dakota Access is intended to carry crude oil 1,172 miles from North Dakota, a centre of the US shale revolution, to Illinois, en route to refineries around America. The case that it would add to global greenhouse gas emission will be harder to make than for Keystone XL, which would have brought crude from the high-emitting oil sands of western Canada, but the campaigners are certain to try.If Dakota Access is stopped, it will have a significant impact not just on energy Transfer Partners, the company leading the project, but on all North Dakota oil producers and their customers, who will be forced to use more expensive rail transport.Climate change is now an unavoidable business issue. In an excellent paper last week, BlackRock, the world’s largest fund manager, set out some of the ways that investors can reduce their exposure to the risks and benefit from the opportunities that it creates. The paper is a landmark in the rising awareness of the issue among mainstream investors. It is one thing when a philanthropic fund with assets of a few hundred million takes a stand on climate issues, quite another when the warnings come from a company with about $4.9tn under management. As BlackRock points out, investors’ personal views on climate science are irrelevant. Enough governments and businesses are convinced by the scientific consensus that the threat is real, and are driving regulatory and technological changes that interested in you.六If the world is to reduce the risk of catastrophic global warming to acceptable levels, there will have to be a huge reallocation of capital away from fossil fuels and toward low-emission energy sources. That shift has begun, but it needs to go much further. The transition is not straightforward: for as long as oil is the lifeblood of the world’s transport, pipelines will be needed. But when investors and boards make decisions about projects like Dakota Access, they will have to consider their impact on greenhouse gas emissions. The financial consequences of climate change can no longer be ignored.Which one of the following is not the measure taken by US government to deal with climate change? （ ）.A.Stop the Dakota Access permanentlyB.Join the Paris climate agreement.C.Require federal agencies to take climate change into consideration when making decisions.D.Suspend the construction of Dakota Access.
资料：Earlier this month, presidents Barack Obama of the US and Xi Jinping of China made an important symbolic gesture when they committed their countries, the two largest greenhouse gas emitters, to the Paris climate agreement. It was the clearest signal yet to investors worldwide that they need to think about the implications of global warming for their portfolios.On Friday afternoon there was an example of what that might mean Mr Obama’s administration issued an order temporarily blocking construction on a section of the Dakota Access oil pipeline. The move was a response to local concerns raised by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe about potential damage to historic sites and the threats of oil spills. But it is the global issue of climate change that had raised the profile of Dakota Access, making it into a cause celebre for US environmental campaigners. Bill McKibben of 350.org, which played a key role in the successful effort to stop the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada, has suggested that Mr Obama could block Dakota Access permanently, on the grounds that it would exacerbate the threat of climate change.Last month, the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality issued new guidance for federal agencies, making clear that their decisions should take into account “the potential effects of a proposed action on climate change”, and quantify their consequences for greenhouse gas emissions. Dakota Access is intended to carry crude oil 1,172 miles from North Dakota, a centre of the US shale revolution, to Illinois, en route to refineries around America. The case that it would add to global greenhouse gas emission will be harder to make than for Keystone XL, which would have brought crude from the high-emitting oil sands of western Canada, but the campaigners are certain to try.If Dakota Access is stopped, it will have a significant impact not just on energy Transfer Partners, the company leading the project, but on all North Dakota oil producers and their customers, who will be forced to use more expensive rail transport.Climate change is now an unavoidable business issue. In an excellent paper last week, BlackRock, the world’s largest fund manager, set out some of the ways that investors can reduce their exposure to the risks and benefit from the opportunities that it creates. The paper is a landmark in the rising awareness of the issue among mainstream investors. It is one thing when a philanthropic fund with assets of a few hundred million takes a stand on climate issues, quite another when the warnings come from a company with about $4.9tn under management. As BlackRock points out, investors’ personal views on climate science are irrelevant. Enough governments and businesses are convinced by the scientific consensus that the threat is real, and are driving regulatory and technological changes that interested in you.六If the world is to reduce the risk of catastrophic global warming to acceptable levels, there will have to be a huge reallocation of capital away from fossil fuels and toward low-emission energy sources. That shift has begun, but it needs to go much further. The transition is not straightforward: for as long as oil is the lifeblood of the world’s transport, pipelines will be needed. But when investors and boards make decisions about projects like Dakota Access, they will have to consider their impact on greenhouse gas emissions. The financial consequences of climate change can no longer be ignored.What can we learn from Paragragh 5? （ ）A.BlackRock is philanthropic fund that cares about climate change.B.Investors can take the opportunities brought by climate change.C.The threat brought by climate change still needs scientific evidence.D.What investors think of the climate change is very important.
We have to get that car fixed （）.Ano matter it costs how muchBno matter how much costs itCno matter how much it costsDno matter how much does it cost
We have to get that car fixed （）.A、no matter it costs how muchB、no matter how much costs itC、no matter how much it costsD、no matter how much does it cost
单选题We have to get that car fixed （）.Ano matter it costs how muchBno matter how much costs itCno matter how much it costsDno matter how much does it cost