In many parts of the world, cars play an important role in daily life and many societies would not exist without them. So the idea that in 20 years’ time, no one will own cars may be hard to believe. But this is the prediction made by a team of transport researchers who are taken seriously, not only by government but also by car manufacturers.
The Human Science and Advanced Technology Institute at Loughborough in the UK is part of an international research program. The team there believes that by 2020 all cars will be computerized, which will mean much saving, no accidents and better use of roads. The super-intelligent car of the 21^st century will drive itself, and it will not be owned by one individual. Instead, we will have a choice of cars and change them as frequently as we change our clothing.
According to Dr. David Davis , who leads the research team, these predictions are based on the rising cost of the car culture, which has blocked up our cities, polluted our air , and caused more deaths than both world wars put together.
Davis says, cars will be fitted with some intelligent devices to regulate the distance between one car and another. The car will automatically speed up, or slow down, to match the speed of the car in front. Computers are much safer drivers than people, so cars in a road train will be able to drive much closer together than cars driven by people.
By 2010, Dr. David Davis believes, car technology will give motorists a clear view of the road, whatever the weather conditions, by projecting an image of the road ahead on to the car’s windscreen. And by 2020, cars will travel in convoy, linked to each other electronically. Cars will be connected by an electronic tow bar to the car in front to form “road–trains”. “The front vehicle in such a train burns the normal amount.” says Davis. “But all the others in the train would burn about ten percent of the normal amount, and so produce about ten percent of the pollution.”
【小题1】We know from the passage that governments and car manufacturers _______

1. The car will speed up out of control.
2. We will own as many cars as we want.
3. All cars will be driven by computers.
4. Cars will produce more pollution than present ones.

1. cars play a very important role in daily life
2. many societies would stop functioning without cars
3. cars should not be owned by one individual
4. it causes many deaths to human society

1. Motorists will get a clear view of the road.
2. The weather condition will not have effect on motorists.
3. There will be less pollution caused by car.
4. All trains will burn less fuel than present.

Homeownership has let us down. For generations, Americans believed that owning a home was undoubtedly good. Our political leaders hammered home the point. Franklin Roosevelt held that a country of homeowners was “unconquerable.” Homeownership could even save babies, save children, save families and save America. A house with a lawn and a fence wasn’t just a nice place to live in or a risk-free investment; it was a way to shape a nation. No wonder leaders of all political types wanted to spend more than $100 billion a year on subsidies（补助）and tax breaks to encourage people to buy.
But the dark side of homeownership is now all too apparent: Indeed, easy lending stimulated（刺激）by the cult of homeownership may have triggered（引起）the financial crisis. Housing remains a drag on the economy. Existing-home sales in April dropped 27% from the previous month, worsening fears of a double-dip. And all that is just the obvious tale of a housing bubble and what happened when it popped. The real story is deeper and darker still.
For the better part of a century, politics, industry and culture lined up to create a fetish of the idea of buying a house. Homeownership has done plenty of good over the decades; it has provided stability to tens of millions of families. Yet by idealizing the act of buying a home, we have ignored the downsides. In the bubble years, lending standards slipped dramatically, allowing many Americans to put far too much of their income into paying for their housing. And we ignored longer-term phenomena too. Homeownership contributed to the hollowing out of cities and kept renters out of the best neighborhoods. It fed America’s overuse of energy and oil. It made it more difficult for those who had lost a job to find another. Perhaps worst of all, it helped us become casually self-deceiving: By telling ourselves that homeownership was a pathway to wealth and stable communities and better test scores, we avoided dealing with these frightening issues head-on.
Now, as the U.S. recovers from the biggest housing bust（破产）since the Great Depression, it is time to rethink how realistic our expectations of homeownership are—and how much money we want to spend chasing them. Many argue that homeownership should not be a goal pursued at all costs.
【小题1】Political leaders wanted to spend money encouraging people to buy houses because______.

I made a pledge (发誓) to myself on the way down to the vacation beach cottage. For two weeks I would try to be a loving husband and father. Totally loving .  No ifs, ands or buts.
The idea had come to me as I listened to a talk on my car radio. The speaker was quoting (引用) a Biblical (圣经的) passage about husbands being thoughtful（体贴的） of their wives. Then he went on to say," Love is an act of will. A person can choose to love." To myself, I had to admit that I had been a selfish husband. Well , for  two weeks that would change.
And it did. Right from the moment I kissed Evelyn at the door and said," That new yellow sweater looks great on you."
"Oh, Tom, you noticed," she said, surprised and pleased, maybe a little puzzled.
After the long drive, I wanted to sit and read. Evelyn suggested a walk on the beach. I started to refuse, but then I thought, "Evelyn's been alone here with the kids all the week and now she wants to stay with me. " We walked on the beach while the children flew their kites.
So it went. Two weeks of not calling the Wall Street firm where I am a director; a visit to the shell museum though I usually hate museums. Relaxed and happy, that's how the whole vacation passed, I made a new pledge to keep on remembering to choose love. There was one thing that went wrong with my experiment, however. Evelyn and I still laugh about it today. Last night at our cottage, preparing for bed, Evelyn stared at me with the saddest expression.
“What’s the matter?” I asked her.
“ Tom ,” se said in a voice filled with distress, “ do you know something I don’t?”
"What do you mean?"
"Well...that checkup(体检) I had several weeks ago...our doctor...did he tell you something about me? Tom , you've been so good to me... am I dying?"
It took a moment for it all to sink in. Then I burst out laughing.
"No, honey," I said, wrapping her in my arms. "You're not dying; I'm just staring to live."
71.  In the first paragraph, "No ifs, ands or buts" probably means___.
A. unnecessarily     B. unexpectedly    C.   impossibly    D. unconditionally
72. From the story we may infer that Tom went to the beach cottage___.
A. with his family    B. with Evelyn     C. alone           D. with his children
73. During the two weeks on the beach, Tom showed more love to his wife because___.
A. she looked lovely in her new clothes
B. he had made a lot of money in Wall Street
C. he was determined to be a good husband
D. she was seriously ill
74.  The underlined words "one thing" in the passage refer to the fact that___.
A. he praised her sweater, which puzzled her
B. she insisted on visiting a museum, which he hated
C. he knew something about her illness but didn't tell her
D. he was so good to her that she thought she must be dying
75.  By saying "I'm just starting to live", Tom means that___.
A. he is just beginning to understand the real meaning of life
B. he is just beginning to enjoy his life as a loving husband
C. he lived an unhappy life before and is now starting to change
D. he is beginning to feel regretful for what he did to his wife

Cellphones: is there a cancer link?
Could your cellphone give you cancer? Whether it could or not, some people are worrying about the possibility that phones, power lines and wi-fi could be responsible for a range of illnesses, from rashes to brain tumors.
Some say there is evidence to support the growing anxieties. David Carpenter, a professor of environmental health sciences at the university at Albany, in New York, thinks there’s a greater than 95 percent chance that power lines can cause childhood leukemia(白血病). Also there’s a greater than 90 percent chance that cellphones can cause brain tumors. “It’s apparent now that there’s a real risk,” said Carpenter.
But others believe these concerns are unjustified. Dr Martha Linet, the head of radiation epidemiology(流行病学) at the US National Cancer Institute, has looked at the same research as Carpenter but has reached a different conclusion. “I don’t support warning labels for cellphones,” said Linet. “We don’t have the evidence that there’s much danger.”
Studies so far suggest a weak connection between EMFs(电磁场) and illness — so weak that it might not exist at all. A multinational investigation of cellphones and brain cancer, in 13 countries outside the US, has been underway for several years. It’s funded in part by the European Union, in part by a cellphone industry group. The final report should come out later this year, but data so far don’t suggest a strong link between cellphone use and cancer risk.
【小题1】From the passage we can learn that some people are worried because   .

Coupons to spend
“How did you spend your coupons?”
On their first day back to school, many students in Hangzhou greeted each other this way.
The coupons referred to the 100 yuan coupons each student received form the city government before the Spring Festival holidays. Over 260,000 primary school and middle school students were given coupons. They could use them in local stores and supermarkets, or to see movies and buy books.
The same coupons have also been given to low income families in Hangzhou. Other cities, including Chengdu and Nanjing, also gave coupons to their citizens. More cities are expected to follow their lead.
Why are local governments doing this?
These programmes are all part of a broader effort in China to increase domestic demand in the face of the global financial crisis.
The crisis has seriously affected China’s exports and investments (投资). Many factories in southern cities have been closed down. Some companies are laying off workers or reducing their pay. The stock market and real estate market have been falling.
In a time of financial crisis, people usually respond by saving money. They are uncertain about the future and are afraid that more difficult times may be ahead. Now many people are choosing not to spend money carelessly. Major chain stores have seen a sharp slowdown in sales, analysts say.
But spending keeps an economy healthy. If people don’t spend, there will be too many products in the market. Then shops will stop buying products from factories. When factories receive no orders, they close down. The workers there accordingly lose their jobs. Also, if people don’t spend, the service industry suffers. The total result is that the whole economy breaks down.
Issuing coupons is a practical and effective way to increase domestic demand in the current situation, said Jiang Zengwei, vice-minister of China’s Ministry of Commerce. Hangzhou reported a rise in customers in local markets during Spring Festival holiday.
However, issuing coupons is only a temporary measure. To increase consumers’ confidence, the government needs to establish a sound secure social system in the long term. When people don’t have to worry about education, health care and their pension, they will be more willing to spend instead of saving.
【小题1】Why are local governments issuing coupons?