Question

【题目】 At the World Economic Forum last month, President Trump drew claps when he announced the United States would respond to the forum's proposal to plant one trillion(万亿) trees to fight climate change. The trillion-tree idea won wide attention last summer after a study published in the journal Science concluded that planting so many trees was “the most effective climate change solution to date”.

If only it were true. But it isn't. Planting trees would slow down the planet's warming, but the only thing that will save us and future generations from paying a huge price in dollars, lives and damage to nature is rapid and considerable reductions in carbon release from fossil fuels, to net zero by 2050.

Focusing on trees as the big solution to climate change is a dangerous diversion(偏离). Worse still, it takes attention away from those responsible for the carbon release that are pushing us toward disaster. For example, in the Netherlands, you can pay Shell an additional 1 euro cent for each liter of regular gasoline you put in your tank, to plant trees to balance the carbon release from your driving. That's clearly no more than disaster slightly delayed. The only way to stop this planet from overheating is through political, economic, technological and social solutions that end the use of fossil fuels.

There is no way that planting trees, even across a global area the size of the United States, can absorb the huge amounts of fossil carbon released from industrial societies. Trees do take up carbon from the atmosphere as they grow. But this uptake merely replaces carbon lost when forests were cleared in the first place, usually long ago. Regrowing forests where they once grew can undo some damage done in the past, but even a trillion trees can't store enough carbon to head off dramatic climate changes this century.

In a sharp counter argument to last summer's Paper in Science, Justin Gillis wrote in the same journal in October that the study's findings were inconsistent with the dynamics of the global carbon cycle. He warned that “the claim that global tree restoration(复原) is our most effective climate solution is simply scientifically incorrect and dangerously misleading”.

【1】What do we know about the trillion-tree idea?

A.It was published in a journal.

B.It was proposed last summer.

C.It was put forward by Trump.

D.It drew lots of public attention.

【2】What is paragraph 3 mainly about?

A.A drawback of the tree planting strategy.

B.An example of balancing carbon release.

C.An anecdote of making a purchase at Shell.

D.A responsibility for politicians and economists.

【3】What was Justin Gillis's attitude towards global tree restoration?

A.Indifferent.B.Opposed.

C.Hesitant.D.Supportive.

【4】What is the best title for the text?

A.Contradictory Ideas on Tree Planting.

B.A Trillion Trees Come to the Rescue.

C.Planting Trees Won't Save the World.

D.The Best Solution to Climate Change.

Answer 1

【答案】

【1】D

【2】A

【3】B

【4】C

【解析】

本文为一篇议论文。文章论述了作者不赞成美国总统Trump响应 “种一万亿棵树”来对抗气候变化的倡议，作者认为真正能解决问题的方法是迅速地大量减少碳排放。

【1】

细节理解题。根据第一段The trillion-tree idea won wide attention last summer after a study published in the journal Science concluded that planting so many trees was “the most effective climate change solution to date”.去年夏天，发表在《科学》杂志上的一项研究得出结论，大量种树是“迄今为止最有效的气候变化解决方案”，这 “一万亿棵树”的想法赢得了广泛关注。可知，一万亿树的想法引起了公众的广泛关注。故选D项。

【2】

主旨大意题。根据第三段Focusing on trees as the big solution to climate change is a dangerous diversion(偏离). Worse still, it takes attention away from those responsible for the carbon release that are pushing us toward disaster. 把树木作为解决气候变化的主要办法是一种危险的转移。更糟糕的是，它把注意力从那些对碳排放负责的人身上移开，正是这些人把我们推向灾难。因此，第3段主要论述了以植树来保护环境的缺点。故选A项。

【3】

推理判断题。根据最后一段In a sharp counter argument to last summer's Paper in Science, Justin Gillis wrote in the same journal in October that the study's findings were inconsistent with the dynamics of the global carbon cycle. He warned that “the claim that global tree restoration(复原) is our most effective climate solution is simply scientifically incorrect and dangerously misleading”. Justin Gillis在《科学》杂志上发表了与去年夏天《科学》杂志公布的研究结果截然相反的观点，他认为去年夏天公布的那个研究结果是不符合地球碳循环动力学的。同时，他发出警告：通过植树来解决气候问题是不科学的，是错误的，是危险的，是具有误导性的。推测，Justin Gillis对植树提议是持反对态度的。故选B项。

【4】

主旨大意题。结合全文，文章论述了作者不赞成美国总统Trump响应 “种一万亿棵树”来对抗气候变化的倡议，作者认为真正能解决问题的方法是迅速地大量减少碳排放，种树的想法是不科学的，且具有误导性。C项“植树不会拯救世界。”符合文章主旨，适合作为标题。故选C项。