Question

    Climate emergencies are a bit like buses. You wait an age for one and then three come along at once. Parliaments in the UK and Ireland passed motions declaring a climate emergency in May. Last Monday, Canada followed suit.

It isn’t just parliament sounding the alarm. “This is a climate emergency,” said U.N. climate chief Patricia Espinosa for the first time last Tuesday. Hours earlier, James Bevan of England’s Environment Agency and Vince Cable, the leader of the U.K.’s Liberal Democrats, also used the phrase.

They join a cast of high-profile public figures already on the bus, from UK opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn to UN secretary-general Antonio Guterres. But how did the language of climate change campaigners jump to the lips of the establishment, and should we welcome its seemingly unstoppable adoption?

Does this language make a difference? A day after Canada’s climate emergency motion, it approved a £4.4 billion oil pipeline. Bristol City Council in the UK also declared a climate emergency, yet the city’s mayor subsequently backed expansion of the local airport. Nothing changed on UK streets after parliament declared a climate emergency, notes former Labour Party leader Ed MIliband. “This silent response to an alarm that we ourselves have sounded symbolizes the challenge we face,” he wrote. _______?_______

Mike Hulme at the University of Cambridge argues against the phrase because it implies “time-limited radical(激进的)” action could end the emergency, when climate change is actually a “new condition of human existence.” Some, HUlme included, also fear the language may cause counterproductive responses.

Bur Roz Pidcock of communication organization Climate Outreach says a climate emergency “suggests a response that is very radical in scale and ambition, but not incautious or knee-jerk(本能的),” and certainly not a license for extreme measure like geoengineering the climate.

Despite the risk of phrase being devalued, Rebecca Willis at Lancaster University in the U.K. tells me it is still useful ---and that’s because it is true. As Spratt says, “You cannot solve a problem unless you name it for exactly what it is.” Getting politicians to adopt the language will also be crucial to holding them to tough policy decisions later, says Doug Parr of Greenpeace.

The phrase’s widespread adoption isn’t a problem. The lack of action equivalent to such language is. And that action is going to include a lot of silently gliding electric buses.

1.Which of the following sentences may best end Paragraph 4?

A.We should strive to stimulate people’s initiative.

B.The use of “climate emergency” highlights the challenge.

C.Such a mismatch risks making the term meaningless.

D.There are many people against the use of the phrase.

2.It can be inferred from the passage that Mike Hulme thinks that ______.

A.climate change call for deliberate consideration before action is taken

B.immediate action should be taken to put climate emergency to an end

C.the phrase “climate emergency” may lead to the opposite consequences

D.people all over the world have been accustomed to climate change

3.Which of the following arguments can be used in favour of the phrase “climate emergency”?.

A.Extreme measures will be taken to address the issue of climate change

B.The use of the phrase may contribute to substantial policymaking.

C.The phrase will make no sense unless practical solutions are found.

D.Less attention is paid to the phrase though it reflects a true story.

4.What is the author’s attitude towards the phrase “climate emergency”?

A.Negative B.Optimistic

C.Indifferent D.Objective

Answer

1.C

2.A

3.B

4.D

【解析】

这是一篇议论文。文章介绍了“气候突发事件”这个热门词汇。文章通过举例说明，有些人支持这样说，也有一些人反对这样说。结论是现在各国都知道这个问题，但缺少解决问题的实际行动。

1.推理判断题。由第四段“Bristol City Council in the UK also declared a climate emergency, yet the city’s mayor subsequently backed expansion of the local airport. Nothing changed on UK streets after parliament declared a climate emergency”可知，英国布里斯托尔市议会宣布气候突发事件，但是城市的市长随后支持扩建当地机场。在国会宣布气候突发事件后应该街上没有任何改变。举的例子都是有气候突发事件，但是人们没有采取任何措施，这使得宣布有气候突发事件没有意义。因此，空白处填”这种不匹配可能会让这个术语变得毫无意义”最合适。故选C项。

2.推理判断题。由第五段“Mike Hulme at the University of Cambridge argues against the phrase because it implies “time-limited radical(激进的)” action could end the emergency, when climate change is actually a “new condition of human existence.”可知，剑桥大学的Mike Hulme反对这种表达，因为当气候变化实际上是一个人类存在的新条件时，它暗示的是有时间限制的激进行为可以结束突发事件；由第五段“HUlme included, also fear the language may cause counterproductive responses.”可知，HUlme总结说，担心这种语言会导致适得其反的反应。从Mike Hulme的话可以看出，他认为说提出climate change这个说法前，要充分考虑，不然可能适得其反。所A“在行动前气候变化需要深思熟虑。”是对的。故选A项。

3.细节理解题。由倒数第二段“Getting politicians to adopt the language will also be crucial to holding them to tough policy decisions later,”可知让政客们采纳这种语言，对让他们之后坚持严格的政策决定会很重要。由此可以看出，可以采取严厉的政策来处理气候变化问题，这个表达可以被用来支持气候突发事件这个说法。故选B项。

4.推理判断题。由最后一段“The phrase’s widespread adoption isn’t a problem. The lack of action equivalent to such language is.”可知，这个短语被广泛采用不是问题。缺乏与这样的表达对等的行动才是问题。由此可以看出，作者对其后突发事件这个表达的态度是有正面的也有否定的，是客观的（objective）。故选D项。