理工類AB級輔導資料:閱讀理解Too Little

　　Oil and gas will run out too fast for doomsday global warming scenarios to materialize， according to a controversial new analysis presented this week at the University of Uppsala in Sweden. The authors warn that all the fuel will be burnt before there is enough carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to realize predictions of melting ice caps and searing temperatures. Defending their predictions， scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change say they considered a range of estimates of oil and gas reserves， and point out that coal-burning could easily make up the shortfall. But all agree that burning coal would be even worse for the planet.

　　The IPCCs predictions of global meltdown pushed forward the 1997 Kyoto Protocol， an agreement obliging signatory nations to cut CO2 emissions. The IPCC considered a range of future scenarios， from unlimited burning of fossil-fuels to a fast transition towards greener energy sources. But geologists Anders Sivertsson， Kjell Aleklett and Colin Campbell of Uppsala University say there is not enough oil and gas left even the most conservative of the 40 IPCC scenarios to come to pass.

　　Although estimates of oil and gas reserves vary widely， the researchers are part of a growing group of experts who believe that oil supplies will peak as soon as 2010， and gas soon after. Their analysis suggests that oil and gas reserves combined about to the equivalent of about 3，500 billion barrels of oil considerably less than the 5，000 billion barrels estimated in the most optimistic model envisaged by the IPCC. Even the average forecast of about 8，000 billion barrels is more than twice the Swedish estimate of the worlds remaining reserves.

　　Nebojsa Nakicenovic， an energy economist at the University of Vienna， Austria who headed the 80-strong IPCC team that produced the forecasts， says the panels work still stands. He says they factored in a much broader and internationally accepted range of oil and gas estimates than the “conservative” Swedes.

　　Even if oil and gas run out， “theres a huge amount of coal underground that could be exploited”， he says that burning coal could make the IPCC scenarios come true， but points out that such a switch would be disastrous. Coal is dirtier than oil and gas and produces more CO2 for each unit of energy， as well as releasing large amounts of particulates. He says the latest analysis is a “shot across the bows” for policy makers.

　　1. What do the authors of the new analysis presented at the University of Uppsala intend to say?

　　A. the burning of coal will accelerate the arrival of Earths doomsday.

　　B. The oil reserves are big enough to materialize the doomsday scenarios

　　C. Melting ice caps and searing temperatures exist only in science fiction

　　D. Oil and gas will run out so fast that Earths doomsday will never materialize.

　　2. Nations that signed the Kyoto Protocol agree to

　　A. pay attention to global meltdown

　　B. cut CO2 emissions

　　C. use more green energy

　　D. stop using fossil fuels

　　3. What are the estimates of the worlds oil and gas reserves?

　　A. 4，000 billion barrels by the average forecast

　　B. 8，000 billion barrels estimated by the Swedes

　　C. 3，500 barrels envisaged by IPCC

　　D. 3，500 billion by a growing number of scientists

　　4. Which of the following about Nebojsa Nakicenovic is true?

　　A. he thinks fossil fuels are as dirty as oil and gas

　　B. he thinks green fuels will replace oil and gas eventually

　　C. he thinks IPCCs view on the worlds reserves is too optimistic

　　D. he thinks that IPCCs estimates are more optimistic than the Swedes

　　5. Which of the following is the near explanation of Nakicenovics assertion that “…… such a switch would be disastrous……?

　　A. The IPCC scenarios would come true because burning coal will emit larger amounts of CO2“

　　B. A switch to burning coal would produce disastrous environmental problems

　　C. Oil and gas to replace coal as fuel would speed up the process of global warming

　　D. A switch from the IPCC scenarios to the policymakers ones would be disastrous

　　標準答案： D，B，D，D，B

　　解析：

　　Too Little for Global（全球的） Warming（升溫）

　　1. D. 分析：利用問題句中的特征結構University of Uppsala作為答案線索，這樣找到答案相關句：

　　該句可能理解起來不是很容易，所以可以借助前后句的句意， 而且該句是觀點句，因此后句中很可能會進行進一步的闡述或分析。（第一段）Oil and gas will run out too fast for doomsday global warming scenarios to materialize， according to a controversial new analysis presented this week at the University of Uppsala in Sweden. The authors warn（警告） that all the fuel（燃料） will be burnt before there is enough carbon dioxide（二氧化碳） in the atmosphere（大氣） to realize（實現） predictions（預測） of melting ice caps （冰冠）and searing（燙人的） temperatures.

　　劃線句（對前句內容進行解釋）說“作者警告：在大氣層中中出現足夠的二氧化碳， 導致人們預測的冰冠溶化和全球溫度升高之前，地球上所有的燃料都將已經被消耗光了。”，借助該句內容判斷D 是答案。

　　2. B. 分析：利用問題句中的特征結構Kyoto Protocol作為答案線索，這樣在文章中找到答案相關句：

　　（第2段）The IPCCs predictions of global meltdown（冰雪融化） pushed forward （推動……）the 1997 Kyoto Protocol簽署， an agreement（協議） obliging（迫使） signatory（簽字者） nations to cut CO2 emissions（排放）.

　　該句說“IPCC對全球冰雪融化的預測推動了京都協議的簽訂，京都協議促使簽署國同意減少CO2排放的協議”， 因此判斷B是答案。

　　3. D. 分析：問題問“世界石油和天然氣儲備的估計數量是多少?”， 利用問題句中的細節信息結構oil and gas reserves（石油和天然氣儲備）作為答案線索，同時因為被選想中都出現了數字，因此注意文章中涉及到這些數字的句子：職稱英語培訓

　　Although estimates of oil and gas reserves vary widely， the researchers are part of a growing group of experts who believe that oil supplies（供應） will peak （達到最高峰）as soon as最快 2010， and gas soon after. Their analysis suggests that oil and gas reserves combined（組合的） about to the equivalent of （等值于）about 3，500 billion barrels （缺少句子結構???）of oil considerably（相當地）less than（少于） the 5，000 billion barrels estimated（被估計） in the most optimistic （樂觀的）model（方式） envisaged（設想） by the IPCC.

　　上面的句子說“越來越多的專家認為最快在2010年將會是石油供應的高峰期，隨后是天然氣的高峰期。他們認為石油和天然氣的總量在3，500billion barrels左右，IPCC樂觀的估計額是5，0003，500billion barrels”， 因此判斷D 是答案。

　　4. D. 分析：利用問題句中的特征結構Nebojsa Nakicenovi作為答案線索，有兩個被選項中都提到了IPCC，因此也利用這個詞作為答案線索，這樣在文章找到答案相關句：

　　Nebojsa Nakicenovic， an energy economist（經濟學家） at the University of Vienna， Austria who headed（帶領） the 80-strong（實足的）（有80人的） IPCC team that produced the forecasts， says the panel（小組）s work still stands（有效）.該句說“Nebojsa Nakicenovic認為IPCC小組的工作仍然站得住腳， 是客觀的”， 因此排除C.

　　He says they factored in （把……計算在內）a much broader（廣泛的） and internationally accepted （被接受的）range （范圍）of oil and gas estimates than the “conservative（保守的）” Swedes.該句說“同保守的瑞典人項比， 他們（IPCC小組）把范圍更廣， 國際認定的燃料儲備考慮在內”， 因此可以得出的結論是：IPCC小組在對燃料進行估算上比瑞典人更樂觀。

　　這道體題也可以借助排除法解答：

　　Even if oil and gas run out， “theres a huge amount of coal underground that could be exploited”， he says that burning coal could make the IPCC scenarios come true， but points out that such a switch would be disastrous. Coal is dirtier than oil and gas and produces more CO2 for each unit of energy， as well as releasing （釋放）large amounts of particulates（微粒）.

　　該劃線句說“煤（化石燃料）比石油和天然氣更具有污染性”， 因此排除A. 而文章中根本就沒有具體提到“green fuel”是什么， 因此B 也不是答案，答案只能是D.

　　5.B. 分析：Nakicenovic提出的斷言出現在文章最后的兩段文字中， 被選項中兩處提到了switch一詞，所以利用這個詞作為答案線索，

　　Nebojsa Nakicenovic， an energy economist at the University of Vienna， Austria who headed the 80-strong IPCC team that produced the forecasts， says the panels work still stands. He says they factored in a much broader and internationally accepted range of oil and gas estimates than the “conservative” Swedes.

　　Even if oil and gas run out， “theres a huge amount of coal underground that could be exploited”， he says that burning coal could make the IPCC scenarios come true， but points out that such a switch would be disastrous. 劃線句前部分結構中揭示： switch是指從使用石油和天然氣到使用煤的轉變。 接下來的句子說：Coal is dirtier than oil and gas and produces more CO2 for each unit of energy， as well as releasing large amounts of particulates.（煤比原油和天然氣更具有污染性）， 該句暗示煤的燃燒會造成更大的環境災難， 因此判斷B是答案。

　　互聯網