专家解析大学英语四级考试历年阅读真题(十一)英语四级考试

文章作者 100test 发表时间 2009:07:07 23:39:44
来源 100Test.Com百考试题网

　　Passage 1
　　Is there enough oil beneath the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (保护区) (ANWR) to help secure America’s energy future? President Bush certainly thinks so. He has argued that tapping ANWR’s oil would help ease California’s electricity crisis and provide a major boost to the country’s energy independence. But no one knows for sure how much crude oil lies buried beneath the frozen earth with the last government survey, conducted in 1998, projecting output anywhere from 3 billion to 16 billion barrels.
　　The oil industry goes with the high end of the range, which could equal as much as 10% of U.S. consumption for as long as six years. By pumping more than 1 million barrels a day from the reserve for the next two three decades, lobbyists claim, the nation could cut back on imports equivalent to all shipments to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia. Sounds good. An oil boom would also mean a multibillion-dollar windfall (意外之财) in tax revenues, royalties (开采权使用费) and leasing fees for Alaska and the Federal Government. Best of all, advocates of drilling say, damage to the environment would be insignificant. “We’ve never had a document case of oil rig chasing deer out onto the pack ice.” says Alaska State Representative Scott Ogan.
　　Not so far, say environmentalists. Sticking to the low end of government estimates, the National Resources Defense Council says there may be no more than 3.2 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil in the coastal plain of ANWR, a 0drop in the bucket that would do virtually nothing to ease America’s energy problems. And consumers would wait up to a decade to gain any benefits, because drilling could begin only after much bargaining over leases, environmental permits and regulatory review. As for ANWR’s impact on the California power crisis, environmentalists point out that oil is responsible for only 1% of the Golden State’s electricity output—and just 3% of the nation’s.
　　21. What does President Bush think of tapping oil in ANWR?
　　A) It will exhaust the nation’s oil reserves.
　　B) It will help secure the future of ANWR.
　　C) It will help reduce the nation’s oil imports.
　　D) It will increase America’s energy consumption.(C)
　　22. We learn from the second paragraph that the American oil industry ________.
　　A) believes that drilling for oil in ANWR will produce high yields
　　B) tends to exaggerate America’s reliance on foreign oil
　　C) shows little interest in tapping oil in ANWR
　　D) expects to stop oil imports from Saudi Arabia(A)
　　23. Those against oil drilling in ANWR argue that ________.
　　A) it can cause serious damage to the environment
　　B) it can do little to solve U.S. energy problems
　　C) it will drain the oil reserves in the Alaskan region
　　D) it will not have much commercial value(B)
　　24. What do the environmentalists mean by saying “Not so fast” (Line 1, Para. 3)?
　　A) Oil exploitation takes a long time
　　B) The oil drilling should be delayed
　　C) Don’t be too optimistic
　　D) Don’t expect fast returns(C)
　　25. It can be learned from the passage that oil exploitation beneath ANWR’s frozen earth ________.
　　A) remains a controversial issue
　　B) is expected to get under way soon
　　C) involves a lot of technological problems
　　D) will enable the U.S. to be oil independent(A)
　　这篇材料主要内容是对应否在阿拉斯加进行石油开采进行论述，三大段恰好阐述了三方面的观点。第一段开头首先以一个疑问句提出了论题，Is there enough oil …… to help secure America’s energy future?问的是阿拉斯加地下是否蕴藏了足以为拯救美国的能源未来提供助力的石油。接下来文章抛出了布什总统也就是美国政府的正面观点，该观点认为阿拉斯加的石油可以缓解加利福尼亚考(试^大的电力危机，并为国家的能源独立提供助推(would help ease California’s electricity crisis and provide a major boost to the country’s energy independence)。文章进而引述了政府勘测数据，说明阿拉斯加地区的石油储量达到30亿到160亿桶，不过这里使用了否定句式(no one knows for sure)，表明对这一数据的怀疑态度，这样就自然地引出了后面两种截然不同的观点。
　　第一种观点来自于石油业界——“The oil industry goes with the high end of the range”，这里的high end指的就是160亿桶，而go with表示认同了数据中的高点——160亿桶。支持开采的论据有三点，第一是可以减少大量石油进口(cut back on imports)，第二是额外收入大笔税款、开采权使用费和租金(a multibillion-dollar windfall in tax revenues, royalties and leasing fees)第三是对环境的影响微乎其微(damage to the environment would be insignificant)。
　　第二种观点来自于环保主义者——Sticking to the low end of government estimates，low end指的30亿桶，而stick to表示认同数据中30亿桶的低点。反对开采的论据也有三点，第一是石油蕴藏量只有32亿桶，对美国能源问题来说只能是杯水车薪(do virtually nothing to ease America’s energy problems)，第二是消费者要等上十年时间才能获得利益(consumers would wait up to a decade to gain any benefits)，第三，针对政府提出的阿拉斯加石油可以缓解加利福尼亚电力危机的观点，环保主义者指出石油在加利福尼亚发电能源中只占1%(oil is responsible for only 1% of the Golden State’s electricity output)。