试题详情
阅读理解-阅读单选 适中0.65 引用1 组卷110

Levels of an ozone-destroying chemical are mysteriously rising, despite international efforts to crack down on the problem. The uptick in the airborne chemical HCFC-141b comes even though reported production has declined steadily since 2012, leaving scientists stumped about the source. “All I can really say is these emissions are up,” says Luke Western, an atmospheric scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Global Monitoring Laboratory, who helped lead the new research.

The discovery underscores the challenge of getting rid of these once widely used chemicals, which can linger in appliances for decades. It also shows how continent-size gaps in a network of sensors make it hard to pinpoint sources of the problem.The chemical, used chiefly to make foam insulation for appliances such as refrigerators, is part of a family of fluorocarbon molecules blamed for eating away at a layer of stratospheric ozone, roughly 20 kilometers above the ground, that filters out harmful ultraviolet radiation from the Sun. The world began to wean itself off these chemicals under the 1987 Montreal Protocol, widely considered the most successful international environmental treaty. Overall, ozone-damaging chemicals have declined steadily since the early 2000s, and the ozone “holes” above the poles have begun to heal.

In 2018, however, researchers reported that levels of the banned chemical CFC-11 had been rising since 2012. An international panel concluded that surge was likely due to illicit production, much of it in eastern China, perhaps because HCFC-141b, then used as a substitute for CFC-11 because it is less destructive to ozone, was in scarce supply. Releases of CFC-11 started to fall once again in 2019. By now production of HCFC-141b should also be declining. Its phase-out began in 2013, with a complete ban scheduled for 2030. It is already being replaced by a group of chemicals that doesn’t damage the ozone layer.

But scientists say atmospheric levels of HCFC-141b are actually rising. Emissions have climbed each year between 2017 and 2021, an increase totaling 3000 tons from 2017 to 2020, the researchers estimate. The findings, based on a combination of measurements from air sensors and computer models of how the gases move through the atmosphere, were posted online on 27 April by Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, although the paper hasn’t been peer reviewed yet. The rise of the newer chemical doesn’t appear to be a repeat of the CFC-11 incident, says Stephen Montzka, an atmospheric scientist who heads NOAA’s monitoring lab and led the work that uncovered the CFC-11 emissions. “I think in the instance of 141b the situation is much murkier,” he says. Results from air sensors in South Korea suggest the problem isn’t originating from eastern China. It does seem to be coming from somewhere in the Northern Hemisphere, because levels have risen faster there than in the south.

One possibility is that unreported HCFC-141b is being manufactured somewhere in the world, Montzka says. But the blip could also be temporary, triggered as aging appliances are thrown out and the foam breaks down, releasing the gas. “Taking a close look, we realized there are possible explanations that don’t require somebody doing something that they weren’t supposed to do,” Montzka says.The monitoring work in papers like this is “critical,” says Helen Walter-Terrinoni, a member of the Montreal Protocol’s technical panel and a chemical engineer with the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute, which represents major manufacturers. The panel reports every 4 years on the state of ozone-depleting gases and the science surrounding them. Its new report, slated for 2023, “could help shed more light on what’s going on” with the rising emissions, Walter-Terrinoni says.

For now, gaps in the air sensor network have made answers elusive. The sensors are concentrated in North America and Europe, with only a handful in East Asia and at isolated sites elsewhere. Scientists are blind to what’s happening in much of India, Russia, and the Middle East, and most of Africa and South America. “If there were emissions in those regions,” Montzka says, “we wouldn’t be able to tell you very accurately where they are coming from.”

The picture could improve in the coming years. In the wake of the CFC-11 incident, an EU-funded initiative is underway to install more sensors and close some of those gaps. For now, Montzka isn’t alarmed about the added dose of chemicals. It amounts to a “small perturbation” in the ozone layer, he says, just a fraction of 1% of the ozone-damaging power of gases now in the atmosphere.

【小题1】Which type of writing does this passage belong to?
A.Descriptive writing.B.Expository writing.C.Persuasive writing.D.Narrative writing.
【小题2】What is the meaning of the underline word ‘illicit’ in Paragraph 3?
A.Valid.B.Licensed.C.Constitutional.D.Illegal.
【小题3】What is the possible reason can explain the fact that atmospheric levels of HCFC-141b are actually rising now?
A.Ground filters out harmful ultraviolet radiation from the Sun.
B.The world began to wean itself off these chemicals.
C.Unreported HCFC-141b is being manufactured somewhere in the world.
D.Ozone-damaging chemicals haven’t declined steadily.
【小题4】Which of the following can be the best title for the text?
A.Atmospheric Levels of HCFC-141b Are Actually Rising
B.Bad Picture Could Improve in The Coming Years
C.Ozone-destroying Chemical Is on The Rise Despite Crackdown
D.Continent-size Gaps in Sensors Make It Hard to Pinpoint Sources of The Problem
21-22高二下·浙江杭州·阶段练习
知识点:环境污染社会问题与社会现象说明文 答案解析 【答案】很抱歉,登录后才可免费查看答案和解析!
类题推荐

Many of the world’s largest consumer product companies, including Coca-Cola, Unilever and PepsiCo, have set ambitious targets for replacing original plastics with recycled ones-typically 25% of their total packaging by 2025. So far, however, most companies have made modest progress and will need to accelerate their efforts to reach these high goals, according to a new cover story in Chemical& Engineering News, an independent news outlet of the American Chemical Society.

In the U.S., only about 10% of plastics are recycled into new products, compared with nearly33% in Europe, writes senior editor Alex Tullo. Facing increasing consumer pressure, many companies have made big promises to increase the amount of recycled plastics they use in packaging to 25%-50% by 2025 or 2030. However, most currently hover at a recycling rate between 2% and 12%, meaning that they will need to greatly speed up their efforts in order to succeed. Meeting the goals will require new technologies to help make plastics easier to recycle, as well as widespread collaboration and investment among brand owners, consumers, recycling facilities, chemical companies and others.

In traditional mechanical recycling, facilities sort through consumers’ recyclables collected local trash porters, separating plastics from metal, glass and other materials. To ease this dud process, AMP Robotics has developed a machine with learning-based technology that identify different types of plastics and pulls unwanted materials off the line with an inflated(充气的)arm. Next, the separated plastics are cut, washed, melted and reshaped. Then, plastics intended for food packaging undergo additional finishing steps.

Although recycling firms have developed new technologies, such as solvent extraction(溶剂萃取), to recycle different types of plastic more efficiently, consumer product companies must redesign their packaging, for example, by removing various plastics and metalized layers, to make them easier to recycle. Also, experts say that consumers need to do their part by putting more of their used plastics into recycling bins.

【小题1】To achieve the high goals in recycling, what need those companies do?
A.Promise to use more recycled plastics in packaging.
B.Connect new technologies with traditional recycling.
C.Turn to AMP Robotics with learning-based technology.
D.Combine new technologies, cooperation with financial support.
【小题2】Compared with traditional recycling, what is the advantage of AMP Robotics?
A.It can separate plastics from multiple materials.
B.It can identify and pick out the unwanted plastics.
C.It can recycle plastics for food packaging directly.
D.It can use solvent extraction to ease plastics recycling.
【小题3】What can be inferred from the last paragraph?
A.Solvent extraction is a traditional recycling method.
B.Consumers are expected to practice garbage classification.
C.Recycling firms should remove plastics layers to ease recycling.
D.Redesigning packaging makes no difference in plastics recycling.
【小题4】What is the text mainly about?
A.Traditional recycling will be replaced.
B.Redesigning the food packaging is very urgent.
C.New technologies are much needed in plastics recycling.
D.There’s a long way to go for plastics recycling.

When you think of the Arctic, you imagine an icy land of pure white snow. Others imagine it as the last really clean place left on Earth. We have polluted the deepest oceans with plastic trash, and now, CNN says, “It’s theArctic’s turn. ”

German scientists have recently found microplastics in Arctic snow, the Associated Press reported.   Microplastics are pieces of plastic smaller than 5 millimeters. Sadly, the scientists found 1,800 pieces of microplastic per liter of snow.

How is plastic pollution reaching the Arctic? According to scientists, “It’s readily apparent that the majority of the microplastic in the snow comes from the air. ” They fall off of plastic objects and are moved by the wind, just like dust. They mix with ice in the air and fall to the ground as snow. Finding these plastics in Arctic snow means that we may breathe them in. An even higher amount of microplastic was found in the snow around cities.

The high concentrations found in snow samples suggest microplastics, which contain rubber or chemicals used in synthetic fabrics, may cause significant air pollution.

Are they bad for us? Scientists cannot answer this question for now, according to the World Health Organization. We do know that our bodies cannot take in “large” pieces of microplastics. However, if the plastics are small enough, they can find ways into our bodies and stay there for a long time, which can be bad for our health. What’s more, earlier studies have shown that microplastics may contribute to lung cancer risk, heightening the need to further assess(评估)the risks of taking them in, the study said.

Microplastics have also been found in rivers and oceans around the world. Previous research has found that they flow over long distances and into our oceans, damaging ecosystems along the way. They start in our wastewater, when we wash clothes with plastic fibers. The wastewater then flows into rivers and out to sea, where they are eaten by sea animals. If people then eat these animals, it means that we’re eating the plastic as well.

【小题1】What does the author mean by “It’s the Arctic’s turn.” in Paragraph 1?
A.The Arctic is pictured as an icy land of pure white snow.
B.The Arctic has also been polluted by plastics.
C.The Arctic is the last really clean place on Earth.
D.People still knew nothing about the Arctic.
【小题2】From the second Paragraph we know that microplastics are ____________
A.very tiny pieces of plastics.B.like dust.
C.larger than 5 millimeters.D.mixed with snow.
【小题3】Why do we need to pay greater attention to the risks of absorbing microplastics?
A.They can find ways into our bodies.B.They can stay in our body for a long time
C.They may lead to lung cancer.D.They are small enough.
【小题4】What is the best title for the text?
A.Plastic snow falls from the sky.B.Microplastics contain rubber or chemicals.
C.The Arctic is an icy land of pure white snow.D.Rivers and oceans are in danger.

You are welcome to our channel. An interest in the way ocean currents move led Dr. Erik van Sebille to track garbage. This Dutch scientist hopes that by making us aware of how much we litter our oceans, we’ll be motivated to better stash (存放) our garbage.

Question: Where does the garbage in our oceans come from ?
Answer: It can come from litter people leave behind on beaches. Or from things falling off ships. Almost every river’s garbage will end up in the ocean too. Plastic garbage is the biggest problem, though. That’s because it doesn’t easily break down. It can stay in the ocean for thousands of years. Eventually, it arrives at the garbage patches (垃圾带).
Question: Does this mean that ocean garbage is worse than garbage on land ?
Answer: Litter in the ocean is probably just as bad as litter in a forest or a park. The main problem in either place is that, if animals eat plastic pieces, they can become very ill. But we know how to solve the problem: Just stop polluting!
Question: Many persons love tossing a message in a bottle into the ocean. Is that a bad idea ?
Answer: Finding a bottle with a message in it is awesome, very special! But most bottles will never end up on a beach. They’ll turn up in the garbage patches, where it’s unlikely that someone will find them. If you want to play with ocean currents, go to the website and release virtual bottles. That way, you’re   not littering our oceans.
【小题1】Animals can become very ill if they _______________.
A.turn up in the garbage patches.B.arrive at the garbage patches.
C.eat plastic pieces.D.play with bottles.
【小题2】It is almost _______________ to toss a message in a bottle into the ocean.
A.educative.B.useful.C.interesting.D.meaningless.
【小题3】This passage belongs to a   _______________.
A.story.B.poem.C.scientific article.D.television interview.

组卷网是一个信息分享及获取的平台,不能确保所有知识产权权属清晰,如您发现相关试题侵犯您的合法权益,请联系组卷网