2007年9月高级口译真题(3)

英语自学网

　　Questions 11-15
　　Right now, Prince Charles is probably wishing he had hit the slopes after all. Britain's Prince of Wales decided last year to begin reducing his carbon footprint-the amount of carbon dioxide created by his activities-by cutting down on his flights abroad, including an annual skiing vacation in Switzerland. Though we should all be in the position to make such sacrifices, Charles didn't win plaudits for his holiday martyrdom. Instead British green groups, seconded by Environment Secretary David Miliband, spanked the Prince for deciding to fly to the U.S. on Jan. 27 to pick up a prestigious environmental award, arguing that the carbon emissions created by his travel canceled out his green cred.
　　It's too easy to mock His Royal Highness; in England it's practically the national sport. But his critics may be onto something. Jets are uniquely polluting, and the carbon they emit at high altitudes appears to have a greater warming effect than the same amount of carbon released on the ground by cars or factories. On an individual level, a single long-haul flight can emit more carbon per passenger than months of SUV driving. Though air travel is responsible for only 1.6% of total greenhouse gas emissions, in many countries it's the fastest-growing single source-and with annual airline passengers worldwide predicted to double to 9 billion by 2025, that growth is unlikely to abate. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) put it bluntly last year: "The growth in aviation and the need to address climate change cannot be reconciled."
　　One of the biggest problems, as the IPCC points out, is that the carbon emitted by air travel currently has "no technofix." As messy a source of pollution as electricity generation and ground transportation are, technologies do exist that could drastically cut carbon from power plants and cars. Not so for planes: the same aircraft models will almost certainly be flying on the same kerosene fuel for decades.
　　Admittedly, the airline industry has improved efficiency over the past 40 years, with technological upgrades more than doubling efficiency. There are tweaks in aircraft operations that could nip carbon emissions even further. Virgin Atlantic airlines tycoon Richard Branson, who pledged $3 billion in the fight against climate change, advocates having planes towed on the ground rather than taxiing, which he has said could cut a yet unspecified portion of fuel on long flights. Emissions trading for the air industry could help as well, with airlines given carbon caps and then being required to purchase credits from other industries if they exceed their limits. But there's nothing On the horizon for aircraft with the carbon-cutting potential of hydrogen engines or solar energy. "It's not like having leaky home windows you can fix with double glazing," says Leo Murray, a spokesman for the green group Plane Stupid, which led the criticism of Prince Charles.
　　Nor is there any replacement for long-haul air travel itself. I can take a train from Boston to Washington, but until we can figure out how to travel via fireplace, Harry Potter-style, the only way I'm getting from Tokyo to New York City is in aircraft that may emit more than 5,200 lbs. (about 2,400 kg) of carbon per passenger, round-trip, according to one estimate. On an individual level, you can try to make your flight carbon neutral by donating to, say, a forestry project that will soak up the greenhouse gases you have created. An increasing number of airlines and travel agents do offer such options. The London-based CarbonNeutral Company reports that requests for carbon offsetting from individual travelers have jumped over the past six months. But the still tiny number of neutralized flights can hardly compensate for the rapid increases in global air travel.
　　So is grounding ourselves the only answer? That seems to be the conclusion of environmentalists in Britain, who also went after Prime Minister Tony Blair for a recent holiday trip to Miami. Though Blair belatedly promised to begin offsetting his leisure travel, he insisted that telling people to fly less was simply impractical-and he's probably right. Some environmentalists suggest that we could learn to live more locally, but good luck keeping them in Brighton after they've seen Beijing-and vice versa. Our best bet for now may be to limit any business and leisure flights that we can and offset the rest. So when you're pondering that luxury Swiss vacation, ask yourself: What would Prince Charles do?
　　11. The sentence "But his critics may be onto something." (para. 2) implies that _______.
　　(A) the critics feel it am easy task to criticize Britain's Prince Charles
　　(B) the critics belong to British green groups
　　(C) the critics are right in pointing out the critical issue in environmental pollution
　　(D) the critics know that long-haul flights emit more carbon dioxide than car driving
            
            

entwo

　　12. Which of the following would be the author's major concern?
　　(A) Air travel is responsible for only 1.6% of total greenhouse gas emissions.
　　(B) The carbon emission by air travel is growing faster than by other industries.
　　(C) The annual airline passengers worldwide are predicted to double to 9 billion by 2025.
　　(D) The carbon released by jets, cars and factories all produces a warming effect.

　　13. What does the author mean by saying that "the carbon emitted by air travel currently has 'no technofix'"(para. 3)?
　　(A) Technologies for carbon reduction in all industries, including aviation, do not exist yet.
　　(B) Technologies are not available for carbon reduction with the current aircraft models.
　　(C) Technologies designed to cut pollution from electricity generation and from air travel are not the same.
　　(D) Technologies to cut carbon from power plants cannot be used to cut carbon from planes.
　　14. The word "tweaks" in the sentence "There are tweaks in aircraft operations that could nip carbon emissions even further."(para. 4) can be paraphrased as _______.
　　(A) theoretical possibilities (B) great inventions
　　(C) minor improvements (D) technological upgrades
　　15. What does the expression "neutralized flights" (para. 5) mean in the passage?
　　(A) You compensate for emission of your flight by joining environmental activities.
　　(B) You replace long-haul air travel by sea or by train to reduce carbon emission.
　　(C) You travel less by air so as to cut carbon emission.
　　(D) You neutralize your flight carbon by being an environmentalist and by taking as few business and leisure flights as possible.
　　Questions 16-20
　　It is hard to escape the fact that in developed societies, despite progress, innovation and prosperity, there is something not quite right. In some cases, it is hard for people to put a fmger on it: a feeling of emptiness and not belonging, a lack of defined relationships and solid social structures. In other respects, it is readily quantifiable: rates of drug abuse, violent crime and depression and suicide are rocketing. Why are we so unhappy? It seems that the Enlightenment brought forth unparalleled liberty in economic, social and political life, but we are now undergoing a midlife crisis. The politics of happiness is nothing new. Aristotle once said that happiness is the goal of life. But for me. the person who brings the great conundrum of personal happiness alive is Robert Kennedy. In a beautifully crafted speech, he said what "makes life worthwhile" is "the health of our children, the quality of their education, they joy of their play," "the strength of our marriages... our devotion to our country" and our "wit...wisdom and courage." And he pointed out that none of these could be measured by gross national product.
　　Nor should we be surprised by the politics of happiness. Ask people,how they are, and they will answer in terms of their family life, community life and work life, rather than just what they are paid. Despite this, it is a notoriously difficult subject for politicians to grasp. One reason is that happiness and well-being are generally not well served by statistical analysis. Politicians, obsessed with inputs and outputs, targets and controls, are flummoxed by immeasurable concepts such as the value people place on spending time with their families. Another reason is that electoral cycles lend themselves to a culture of short-termism, with a need for immediate and quantifiable measurements.
　　One such measurement is GDP. In many ways, increasing this has been the raison d'etre for many center-right political parties since the 1980s. Back then, many developed economies were in a state of economic malaise, with persistently high inflation and unemployment. We needed something to reverse this stagnation and put us back onto the path of prosperity. Thankfully, we got that. Today we need to be just as revolutionary to put us back on track to social prosperity: to respond to that yearning for happiness. That is why I have been arguing in Britain that we need to refocus our energies on general well-being(GWB). It means recognizing the social, cultural and moral factors that give true meaning to our lives. In particular, it means focusing on a sustainable environment and building stronger societies. And yes, it also means recognizing that there is more to life than money: indeed, that quality of life means more than the quantity of money.
　　I think the center-right can be the champions of this cause. The center-left never really get the well-being agenda because they treat individuals as units of account. And they find it difficult to understand how it cannot be delivered simply by the push of a legislator's pen. Instead, the politics of well-being is a politics that needs to be founded on sharing responsibility. Of course, government must take its own responsibilities. But that needs to be part of a wider cultural change: a cultural change that will occur as a consequence of legislation, leadership and social change. What's the government's role? It is to show leadership and set the framework. Showing leadership means leading the change in the many areas that impact on well-being. For example, everyone would agree that spending more time with family is crucial to happiness. Here governments should be pioneers of flexible working with public-sector employees.
　　Setting the right framework means creating incentives and removing barriers to remodel the context within which the whole of society makes choices. Take the environment. Everyone would agree that a cleaner local environment would enhance our well-being. By setting a framework that creates a price for carbon in our economy and encourages green innovation, the government can help people make the better choice.
            
            

enone

　　Ultimately, society's happiness requires us all to play our part. Indeed, playing our part is part of being happy. That is why we need a revolution in responsibility. Corporate responsibility means businesses taking a proactive role, and taking account of their employees' lives. Civic responsibility means giving power back to local government, community organizations and social enterprises so they can formulate local solutions to local problems. And personal responsibility means we all do out bit, be it in cleaning up our local environment or participating in local politics.
　　Professor Neil Browne at Bowling Green State University recently wrote an article: "If Markets Are So Wonderful, Why Can't I Find Friends at the Store?" It is not that markets are bad or that we are doomed to a life of perpetual unhappiness. Rather, given our advances in terms of political freedom, economic enterprise and cultural ingenuity, life could, and should, be more satisfying. That is why focusing on general well-being could be the big, defining political concept of the 21st century. And by recognizing the responsibility every section of society has, we also have the means to enhance it.
　　16. It can be concluded from the passage that the author's major concern is _______.
　　(A) the continuing social progress and prosperity
　　(B) the development of western philosophy
　　(C) corporate, civic and personal responsibilities
　　(D) general well-being of the society
　　17. The expression "flummoxed by" in the sentence "Politicians, obsessed with inputs and outputs, targets and controls, are flummoxed by immeasurable concepts such as the value people place on spending time with their families." (para. 2) can best be replaced by _______.
　　(A) confronted with (B) fascinated with
　　(C) perplexed by (D) haunted by
　　18. According to the passage, why is the happiness of the general public a difficult subject for the government?
　　(A) It can not be adequately explained by statistical data.
　　(B) It is not related to a culture of short-term ism.
　　(C) People need to cope with inflation and unemployment first.
　　(D) People place too much value on happiness and well-being.
　　19. It can be inferred from the passage that the author is most probably _______.
　　(A) an American congressman (B) a British politician
　　(C) an American journalist (D) a British environmentalist
　　20. Which of the following is NOT true according to the passage?
　　(A) Politicians are obsessed with inputs and outputs, targets and controls.
　　(B) short-termism leads to the pursuit of immediate and quantifiable measurements.
　　(C) Center-right political parties have long focused on the increase of GDP.
　　(D) The cause of building GWB can be led by the center-left political parties.
实习编辑：褚萍湘