理工类AB级辅导资料:阅读理解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
标准答案： D，B，D，D，B
解析：
Too Little for Global（全球的） Warming（升温）
1. D. 分析：利用问题句中的特征结构University of Uppsala作为答案线索，这样找到答案相关句：
该句可能理解起来不是很容易，所以可以借助前后句的句意， 而且该句是观点句，因此后句中很可能会进行进一步的阐述或分析。（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（大气） to realize（实现） predictions（预测） of melting ice caps （冰冠）and searing（烫人的） temperatures.
划线句（对前句内容进行解释）说“作者警告：在大气层中中出现足够的二氧化碳， 导致人们预测的冰冠溶化和全球温度升高之前，地球上所有的燃料都将已经被消耗光了。”，借助该句内容判断D 是答案。
2. B. 分析：利用问题句中的特征结构Kyoto Protocol作为答案线索，这样在文章中找到答案相关句：
（第2段）The IPCCs predictions of global meltdown（冰雪融化） pushed forward （推动……）the 1997 Kyoto Protocol签署， an agreement（协议） obliging（迫使） signatory（签字者） nations to cut CO2 emissions（排放）.
该句说“IPCC对全球冰雪融化的预测推动了京都协议的签订，京都协议促使签署国同意减少CO2排放的协议”， 因此判断B是答案。
3. D. 分析：问题问“世界石油和天然气储备的估计数量是多少?”， 利用问题句中的细节信息结构oil and gas reserves（石油和天然气储备）作为答案线索，同时因为被选想中都出现了数字，因此注意文章中涉及到这些数字的句子：职称英语培训
Although estimates of oil and gas reserves vary widely， the researchers are part of a growing group of experts who believe that oil supplies（供应） will peak （达到最高峰）as soon as最快 2010， and gas soon after. Their analysis suggests that oil and gas reserves combined（组合的） about to the equivalent of （等值于）about 3，500 billion barrels （缺少句子结构???）of oil considerably（相当地）less than（少于） the 5，000 billion barrels estimated（被估计） in the most optimistic （乐观的）model（方式） envisaged（设想） by the IPCC.
上面的句子说“越来越多的专家认为最快在2010年将会是石油供应的高峰期，随后是天然气的高峰期。他们认为石油和天然气的总量在3，500billion barrels左右，IPCC乐观的估计额是5，0003，500billion barrels”， 因此判断D 是答案。
4. D. 分析：利用问题句中的特征结构Nebojsa Nakicenovi作为答案线索，有两个被选项中都提到了IPCC，因此也利用这个词作为答案线索，这样在文章找到答案相关句：
Nebojsa Nakicenovic， an energy economist（经济学家） at the University of Vienna， Austria who headed（带领） the 80-strong（实足的）（有80人的） IPCC team that produced the forecasts， says the panel（小组）s work still stands（有效）.该句说“Nebojsa Nakicenovic认为IPCC小组的工作仍然站得住脚， 是客观的”， 因此排除C.
He says they factored in （把……计算在内）a much broader（广泛的） and internationally accepted （被接受的）range （范围）of oil and gas estimates than the “conservative（保守的）” Swedes.该句说“同保守的瑞典人项比， 他们（IPCC小组）把范围更广， 国际认定的燃料储备考虑在内”， 因此可以得出的结论是：IPCC小组在对燃料进行估算上比瑞典人更乐观。
这道体题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 （释放）large amounts of particulates（微粒）.
该划线句说“煤（化石燃料）比石油和天然气更具有污染性”， 因此排除A. 而文章中根本就没有具体提到“green fuel”是什么， 因此B 也不是答案，答案只能是D.
5.B. 分析：Nakicenovic提出的断言出现在文章最后的两段文字中， 被选项中两处提到了switch一词，所以利用这个词作为答案线索，
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. 划线句前部分结构中揭示： switch是指从使用石油和天然气到使用煤的转变。 接下来的句子说：Coal is dirtier than oil and gas and produces more CO2 for each unit of energy， as well as releasing large amounts of particulates.（煤比原油和天然气更具有污染性）， 该句暗示煤的燃烧会造成更大的环境灾难， 因此判断B是答案。
互联网