2015年考研英语阅读理解考前专项训练（4）
发布时间：2012/10/30 22:14:15 来源：城市网学院 编辑：admin
Two years ago, a Danish environmentalist called Bjorn Lomborg had an idea. We all want to makethe world a better place but, given finite resources, we should look for the most cost-effective ways ofdoing so. He persuaded a bunch of economists, including three Nobel laureates, to draw up a list ofpriorities. They found that efforts to fight malnutrition and disease would save many lives at modestexpense, whereas fighting global warming would cost a colossal amount and yield distant and uncertainrewards.
That conclusion upset a lot of environmentalists. This week, another man who upsets a lot of peopleembraced it. John Bolton, America's ambassador to the United Nations, said that Mr Lomborg' sCopenhagen Consensus provided a useful way for the world body to get its priorities straight. Too oftenat the UN, said Mr Bolton, everything is a priority. The secretary-general is charged with carrying out9,000 mandates, he said, and when you have 9,000 priorities you have none.
So, over the weekend, Mr Bolton sat down with UN diplomats from seven other countries to rank40 ways of tackling ten global crises. The problems addressed were climate change, #municablediseases, war, education, financial instability, governance, malnutrition, migration, clean water andtrade barriers.
Given a notional $ 50 billion, how would the ambassadors spend it to make the world a better place?Their conclusions were strikingly similar to the Copenhagen Consensus. After hearing presentations fromexperts on each problem, they drew up a list of priorities. The top four were basic health care, betterwater and sanitation, more schools and better nutrition for children. Averting climate change came last.
The ambassadors thought it wiser to spend money on things they knew would work. Promotingbreast-feeding, for example, costs very little and is proven to save lives. It also helps infants grow upstronger and more intelligent, which means they wilt earn more as adults. Vitamin A supplements cost aslittle as $1, save lives and stop people from going blind. And so on.
For climate change, the trouble is that though few dispute that it is occurring, no one knows howsevere it will be or what damage it will cause. And the proposed solutions are staggeringly expensive.
Mr Lomborg reckons that the benefits of implementing the Kyoto protocol would probably outweigh thecosts, but not until 2100. This calculation will not please A1 Gore. Nipped at the post by George Bushin 2000, Mr Gore calls global warming an onrushing catastrophe and argues vigorously that curbing itis the most urgent moral challenge facing mankind.
Mr Lomborg demurs. We need to realise that there are many inconvenient truths, he says. Butwhether he and Mr Bolton can persuade the UN of this remains to be seen. [460 words]
1. According to some economists, fighting global warming
A. is of little help to make the world a better place
B. is as favorable as fighting malnutrition and disease
C. is not the first priority for us to make the world better
D. is one of the priorities for us to make the world better
2. By saying everything is a priority, John Bolton means that
A. it is reasonable to think of fighting global warming as a priority
B. if you thought that way, there would be no priority at all
C. it is a useful way for the UN to get its priorities straight
D. every mandate to be carried out is actually a priority
3. According to some UN diplomats,
A. fighting global warming is worth spending a huge amount of money on
B. promoting breast-feeding is more urgent than fighting global warming
C. averting climate change should be excluded from the list of priorities
D. there are at least 40 effective ways to tackle the top ten global crises
4. Accordint to the text, Mr Lomborg
A. doubts whether climate change is occurring
B. proposes an ideal solution for climate change
C. knows clearly how severe the future climate change will be
D. questions the immediate benefits of averting climate change
5. It seems that the UN
A. still takes averting climate change as a priority
B. fails to realize many inconvenient truths in the world
C. has its crucial policies challenged by many member countries
D. is trying to tackle all the global crises to make the world better [NextPage] 难句透析
①we all want to make the world a better place but，given finite resources，we should look for the most costeffective ways of doing so.
【结构】本句是由用逗号和“but”连接的两个分句组成的并列句。在第二个分句中，过去分词短语“given finite resources”用做状语。
【释义】我们都希望世界变得更美好。但是，由于资源有限，我们应该寻找成本效益最高的方法去实现我们的愿望。②They found[that“efforts to fight malnutrition and disease would save many lives at modest expense，whereas”fighting global warming would cost a colossal amount and yield distant and uncertain rewards].
【结构】（#）方括号所标示的“that efforts…expense，whereas fighting…rewards”是“found”的宾语从句。这个宾语从句是由用逗号和“whereas”连接的两个分句组成的并列句。
【释义】他们发现，在抗击营养不良和疾病方面无须太高昂费用就能拯救许多生命，而抗击全球变暖将需巨额经费。至于能有什么回报却是长远的事，难以预测。
③For climate change，the trouble is Ithat（though few dispute（that it is occurring））t no one knows（how Severe it will be）or（what damage it will cause）].
【结构】方括号所标示的“that…no one knows…cause”是表语从句。圆括号所标示的“though few dispute…”是其中的让步状语从句。圆括号所标示的“how severe it will be”和“what damage it will cause”是“knows”的宾语从句。
【释义】至于气候变化，问题在于，虽然没什么争议，但是，没有人知道这种变化会多么严重，或者会造成什么损失。④Mr Lomborg reckons[that the benefits of implementing the Kyoto protocol would probably outweigh the COSTS， but not until za003.
【结构】（#）方括号所标示的“that the benefits…but not until 2100”是“reckons”的宾语从句。
【释义】隆伯格先生承认，执行《京都议定书》获得的收益可能会超过所花费的代价，但是，2100年前还不行。
⑤[Nipped at the post by George Bush in 2000]，Mr Gore“calls global warming an”onrushing catastrophe“and”argues vigorously[that curbing it is the most urgent moral challenge facing mankind].
【结构】方括号所标示的过去分词短语“Nipped at…in 2000”用于说明主语“Mr Gore”。本句的主句有两个并列的谓语动词“calls”和“argues”。方括号所标示的“that curbing it…mankind”是“argues”的宾语从句，动名词短语“curbing it”是其中的主语，代词“it”指“global warming”。 #。examda
【释义】在与乔治·布什2000年的美国总统竞选中，戈尔把全球变暖称之为“逐步紧逼的灾难”。他大声疾呼，抑制全球变暖是人类面对的最紧迫的道德挑战。 [NextPage] 全文翻译：
两年前，丹麦环境保护学家伯杨·隆伯格萌生了一个念头。我们都希望世界变得更美好。但是，由于资源有限，我们应该寻找成本效益最高的方法去实现我们的愿望。于是，他劝服许多经济学家，其中包括三位诺贝尔奖得主，共同草拟了一份优先建设项目列表。他们发现，在抗击营养不良和疾病方面无须太高昂费用就能拯救许多生命，而抗击全球变暖将需巨额经费，至于能有什么回报却是长远的事，难以预测。
以上的结果令大批环境保护者大失所望。本周，另一个让大家黯然神伤的人对他们的行动表示赞同，他就是美国驻联合国大使约翰·博尔顿。他声称，隆伯格先生的“哥本哈根共识”为全世界各机构直接了解该优先建设项目提供了一个有效的方法。他还表示，在联合国，“所有的事都是优先项目”是经常出现的局面。秘书长负责执行9000多道委任命令，当一个人拥有9000多个优先权时，他实质上一个都没有。
本周末，博尔顿先生与来自其他7个国家的联合国外交官面对面列出解决全球10大危机的40种方法。商议的问题包括：气候变化、传染病、战争、教育、金融动荡、统制管理、营养不良、移民、清洁水资源以及贸易壁垒。
假设有500亿美金，大使们会如何支配使世界变得更加美好？他们得出的结论与哥本哈根共识惊人地相似。在聆听了每个问题相关专家的陈述后，他们拟出一份优先级列表。排列在前四位的依次是：基础卫生保健、改善水质和卫生设施、建设更多学校以及孩子们更好的营养。气候变化的措施排在最后。
大使们认为把钱花在确定有效的事情上是更为明智的选择。例如，倡导母乳喂养耗资微乎其微但被证实的确可以挽救生命。母乳喂养还可以使婴儿更加强壮、更加聪明地生长，这也意味着他们成人后收入将更高。补充维生素A只需要1美金。但此举可以防止人们失明以及挽救生命。之外还有其他好处。
至于气候变化，问题在于，虽然没什么争议，但是，没有人知道这种变化会多么严重，或者会造成什么损失。同时，提议用来解决这个问题的方法耗资十分巨大。隆伯格先生承认，执行《京都议定书》获得的收益可能会超过所花费的代价。但是，2100年前还不行。这个结果将会使戈尔不悦。在与乔治·布什2000年的美国总统竞选中，戈尔把全球变暖称之为“逐步紧逼的灾难”。他大声疾呼，抑制全球变暖是人类面对的最紧迫的道德挑战。
隆伯格先生对此并不赞同，他说：“我们应该意识到的确存在许多不便言明的真相。”但他与博尔顿先生是否能说服联合国，我们还得拭目以待。
超纲词汇
protocol n.（条约）草案，草约；（外交）议定书
avert vt.避免，防止
laureate n.戴桂冠的人
demur 反对，表示异议，迟疑
notiona adj 概念上的，想象的，象征的
Copenhagen n.哥本哈根
colossal adj.巨大的，庞大的
nip vt.箝，挤，压缩
governance n.统治，管理，控制
mandate n.委托，委任，授权
staggeringly adv.摇晃地，蹒跚地
bunch n.一群，一帮
curb vt.抑制，控制
consensus n.意见一致，多数人的意见，舆论
malnutrition n.营养失调，营养不良
参考答案：1.C 2.B 3.B 4.D 5.A
考研英语阅读理解考前专项训练01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08
考研英语阅读理解考前专项训练09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
考研英语阅读理解考前专项训练17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
考研英语阅读理解考前专项训练25 26 27 28 29 30 总览
