Which is safer --- staying at home, traveling to work on public transport, or working at the office? Surprisingly, each of these carries the same risk, which is very low．However, what about flying compared to working in the chemical industry? Unfortunately, the former is 65 times riskier than the latter! In fact the accident rate of workers in the chemical industry is less than that of almost any of human activity, and almost as safe as staying at home．
The trouble with the chemical industry is that when things go wrong they often cause death to those living nearby．It is this that makes chemical accidents so newsworthy．Fortunately, they are extremely rare．The most famous ones happened at Texas City （1947）, Flixborough （1974）, Seveso （1976）, Pemex （1984） and Bhopal （1984）．
Some of these are always in the minds of the people even though the loss of life was small．No one died at Seveso, and only 28 workers at Flixborough．The worst accident of all was Bhopal, where up to 3,000 were killed．The Texas City explosion of fertilizer killed 552．The Pemex fire at a storage plant for natural gas in the suburbs of Mexico City took 542 lives, just a month before the unfortunate event at Bhopal．
Some experts have discussed these accidents and used each accident to illustrate a particular danger．Thus the Texas City was caused by tons of ammonium nitrate, which is safe unless stored in a great quantity．The Flixborough fireball was the fault of management, which took risks to keep production going during essential repairs．The Seveso accident shows what happens if the local authorities lack knowledge of the danger on their doorstep．When the poisonous gas drifted over the town , local leaders were incapable of taking effective action．The Pemex fire was made worse by an overloaded site in an overcrowded suburb．The fire set off a chain reaction of exploding storage tanks．Yet, by a miracle, the two largest tanks did not explode．Had these caught fire, then 3,000 strong rescue team and fire fighters would all have died．Which of the following statements is TRUE?
| A．Working at the office is safer than staying at home． |
| B．Travelling to work on public transport is safer than working at the office． |
| C．Staying at home is safer than working in the chemical industry． |
| D．Working in the chemical industry is safer than traveling by air． |
Chemical accidents are usually important enough to be reported as news because .
| A．they are very rare |
| B．they often cause loss of life |
| C．they always occur in big cities |
| D．they arouse the interest of all the readers |
According to the passage, the chemical accident that caused by the fault of management happened in_________．
| A．Texas city | B．Flixborough |
| C．Seveso | D．Mexico City |
From the passage we know that “ammonium nitrate” is a kind of _____．
| A．natural gas, which can easily catch fire |
| B．fertilizer, which can't be stored in a great quantity |
| C．poisonous substance, which can't be used in overcrowded areas |
| D．fuel, which is stored in large tanks |
From the discussion among some experts we may conclude that _____．
| A．to avoid any accident we should not repair the facilities in chemical industry |
| B．the local authorities should not be concerned with the production of the chemical industry |
| C．all these accidents could have been avoided or controlled if effective measures had been taken |
| D．natural gas stored in very large tanks is always safe |
Ask someone what they have done to help the environment recently and they will almost certainly mention recycling. Recycling in the home is very important of course. However, being forced to recycle often means we already have more material than we need. We are dealing with the results of that over-consumption in the greenest way possible, but it would be far better if we did not need to bring so much material home in the first place.
The total amount of packaging increased by 12% between 1999 and 2005. It now makes up a third of a typical household’s waste in the UK. In many supermarkets nowadays food items are packaged twice with plastic and cardboard.
Too much packaging is doing serious damage to the environment. The UK, for example, is running out of it for carrying this unnecessary waste. If such packaging is burnt, it gives off greenhouse gases which go on to cause the greenhouse effect. Recycling helps, but the process itself uses energy. The solution is not to produce such items in the first place. Food waste is a serious problem, too. Too many supermarkets encourage customers to buy more than they need. However, a few of them are coming round to the idea that this cannot continue , encouraging customers to reuse their plastic bags, for example.
But this is not just about supermarkets. It is about all of us. We have learned to associate packaging with quality. We have learned to think that something unpackaged is of poor quality. This is especially true of food. But is also applies to a wide range of consumer products, which often have far more packaging than necessary.
There are signs of hope. As more of us recycle, we are beginning to realise just how much unnecessary material are collecting. We need to face the wastefulness of our consumer culture, but we have a mountain to climb.What does the underlined phrase “over-consumption” refer to?
| A．Using too much packaging. |
| B．Recycling too many wastes. |
| C．Making more products than necessary. |
| D．Having more material than is needed. |
According to the text, recycling ______.
| A．helps control the greenhouse effect |
| B．means burning packaging for energy |
| C．is the solution to gas shortage |
| D．leads to a waste of land |
What can we learn from the last paragraph?
| A．Fighting wastefulness is difficult. |
| B．Needless material is mostly recycled. |
| C．People like collecting recyclable waste. |
| D．The author is proud of their consumer culture. |
Open Letter to an Editor
I had an interesting conversation with a reporter recently---one who works for you. In fact, he's one of your best reporters. He wants to leave.
Your reporter gave me a copy of his resume (简历) and photocopies of six stories that he wrote for you. The headlines showed you played them proudly. With great enthusiasm, he talked about how he finds issues (问题), approaches them, and writes about them, which tells me he is one of your best. I'm sure you would hate to lose him. Surprisingly, your reporter is not unhappy. In fact, he told me he really likes his job. He has a great assignment (分工), and said you run a great paper. It would be easy for you to keep him, he said. He knows that the paper values him. He appreciates the responsibility you've given him, takes ownership of his profession, and enjoys his freedom.
So why is he looking for a way out?
He talked to me because he wants his editors to demand so much more of him. He wants to be pushed, challenged, coached to new heights.
The reporter believes that good stories spring from good questions, but his editors usually ask how long the story will be, when it will be in, where it can play, and what the budget is.
He longs for conversations with an editor who will help him turn his good ideas into great ones. He wants someone to get excited about what he's doing and to help him turn his story idea upside down and inside out, exploring the best ways to report it. He wants to be more valuable for your paper. That's what you want for him, too, isn't it?
So your reporter has set me thinking.
Our best hope in keeping our best reporters, copy editors, photographers, artists---everyone--is to work harder to make sure they get the help they are demanding to reach their potential. If we can't do it, they'll find someone who can.What does the writer think of the reporter?
| A．Optimistic. |
| B．Imaginative. |
| C．Ambitious. |
| D．Proud. |
What does the reporter want most from his editors in their talks?
| A．Finding the news value of his stories. |
| B．Giving him financial support. |
| C．Helping him to find issues. |
| D．Improving his good ideas. |
Who probably wrote the letter?
| A．An editor. |
| B．An artist. |
| C．A reporter. |
| D．A reader. |
The letter aims to remind editors that they should __
| A．keep their best reporters at all costs |
| B．give more freedom to their reporters |
| C．be aware of their reporters' professional development |
| D．appreciate their reporters' working styles and attitudes |
I hated dinner parties. But I decided to give them another shot because I'm in London. And my friend Mallery invited me. And because dinner parties in London are very different from those back in New York. There, '“I’m having a dinner party' means: "I'm booking a table for 12 at a restaurant you can't afford and we'll be sharing the checque evenly, no matter what you eat." Worse, in Manhattan there is always someone who leaves before the bill arrives. They'll throw down cash, half of what they owe, and then people like me, who don’t drink, end up paying even more. But if I try to use the same trick, the hostess will shout: "Where are you going?" And it's not like I can say I have somewhere to go: everyone know I have nowhere to go.
But in London, dinner parties are in people's homes. Not only that, the guests are an interesting mix. The last time I went to one, the guests were from France, India. Denmark and Nigeria; it was like a gathering at the United Nations in New York. The mix is less striking. It's like a gathering at Bloomingdale's, a well-known department store.
For New Yorkers, talking about other parts of the world means Brooklyn and Queens in New York. But at Mallery's, when I said that I had been to Myanmar recently, people knew where it was. In New York people would think it was a usual new clubWhat does the word "shot" in Paragraph 1 probably mean?
| A．Choice. |
| B．Try |
| C．Style. |
| D．Goal |
What does the writer dislike most about dinner parties in New York?
A There is a strange mix of people.
B. The restaurants are expensive.
C. The bill is not fairly shared.
D. People have to pay cashWhat does the author think of the parties in London?
A. A bit unusual
B．Full of tricks.
C．Less costly.
D More interesting.What is the author's opinion of some New Yorkers from her experience？
| A．Easy-going. |
| B．Self-centred. |
| C．Generous. |
| D．Conservative. |
It was a village in India. The people were poor. However, they were not unhappy. After all, their forefathers had lived in the same way for centuries.
Then one day. Some visitors from the city arrived. The told the villagers there were some people elsewhere who liked to eat frog’s legs. However, they did not have enough frogs of their own, and so they wanted to buy frogs from other place.
This seemed like money for nothing. There were millions of frogs in the fields around, and they were no use to the villagers. All they had to do was catch them. Agreement was reached, and the children were sent into the fields to catch frogs. Every week a truck arrived to collect the catch and hand over the money. For the first time, the people were able to dream of a batter future. But the dream didn’t last long.
The change was hardly noticed at first, but it seemed as if the crops were not doing so well. More worrying was that the children fell ill more often, and, there seemed to be more insects around lately.
The villagers decided that they couldn’t just wait to see the crops failing and the children getting weak. They would have to use the money earned to buy pesticides(杀虫剂) and medicines. Soon there was no money left.
Then the people realized what was happening. It was the frog. They hadn’t been useless. They had been doing an important job---eating insects. Now with so many frogs killed, the insects were increasing more rapidly. They were damaging the crops and spreading diseases.
Now, the people are still poor. But in the evenings they sit in the village square and listen to sounds of insects and frogs. These sounds of the night now have a much deeper meaning.From paragraph I we learn that the villagers __________.
| A．worked very hard for centuries |
| B．dreamed of having a better life |
| C．were poor but somewhat content |
| D．lived a different life from their forefathers |
Why did the villagers agree to sell frogs?
| A．the frogs were easy money |
| B．They needs money to buy medicine |
| C．they wanted to please the visitors |
| D．the frogs made too much noise |
What might be the cause of the children’s sickness?
| A．the crops didn’t do well |
| B．there were too many insects |
| C．the visits brought in diseases |
| D．the pesticides were overused |
What can we infer from the last sentence of the text?
| A．Happiness comes from peaceful life in the country |
| B．Health is more important than money |
| C．The harmony between man and nature is important |
| D．good old day will never be forgotten |
Forty years ago Sadie left her drunk and violent husband. Needing shelter (住所）for herself and her young son, she took a job as a doorkeeper in a housing project for people. It meant she could live "on site" in one of the .
Eventually, she got to know the residents (居民）.One resident, Archie, didn't have a family of his own, his nephew's wife and her naughty kids would drop in from time to time. They were there to help the old guy.
Sadie helped care for Archie as he illness and it was she who called the who diagnosed (诊断)his deadly cancer. time passing, Sadie's son up, got married and settled several hundred miles away. Sadie and moved into a nice little house of her own. To the loneliness, she took in a series of over the years.
A heavy fall of snow came a year and a half ago. She was pleased when a neighbor to walk her current dog, Muffin, until the weather improved. Each day he would a while talking to her，making sure she was OK, and if she needed anything.
Although she had known him for a long time, Sadie thought to wonder what his last name was. This morning she asked. His surname was the same old Archie's. It brought back a memory and she talked about the . She told him about working at the old residents' flats and was to discover the man who had been "caring" for her for the past year and a half had been one of the little kids who used to run on his way to visit "Uncle Archie".
She had cared for his family, now he was caring for her. ② of them knew it until that moment but they were living proof of the old saying, "What goes around comes around, "and the of kindness will not be broken.
| A．poor | B．senior | C．disabled | D．unfortunate |
| A．groceries | B．stadiums | C．flats | D．cages |
| A．otherwise | B．but | C．though | D．because |
| A．battled | B．banned | C．cured | D．beat |
| A．servant | B．master | C．neighbor | D．doctor |
| A．As | B．Since | C．With | D．When |
| A．grew | B．got | C．went | D．came |
| A．complained | B．retired | C．fired | D．hesitated |
| A．refuse | B．reduce | C．stop | D．escape |
| A．programs | B．projects | C．birds | D．dogs |
| A．attempted | B．declared | C．offered | D．wished |
| A．spend | B．cost | C．take | D．spare |
| A．observing | B．requiring | C．indicating | D．checking |
| A．often | B．never | C．sometimes | D．once |
| A．to | B．from | C．as | D．of |
| A．coincidence | B．comprehension | C．tradition | D．statement |
| A．puzzled | B．frightened | C．concerned | D．surprised |
| A．calling | B．screaming | C．barking | D．whispering |
| A．All | B．None | C．Neither | D．Both |
| A．custom | B．glory | C．pattern | D．circle |