高考閱讀題中的環境保護

羅麗雯

環境保護是不會過時的話題。但環境保護除了那些看上去“高大上”的事情，例如水資源、森林資源保護等，還有近在咫尺的“身邊小事”。在2022年、2018年的全國I卷中，出題老師挑選的文本，講的正是這些容易被忽略的小事，那這兩套題有什么相似之處呢？下面我們看一下這兩篇閱讀。

2022年新高考Ⅰ卷B篇

Like most of us， I try to be mindful of food that goes to waste. The arugula （芝麻菜） was to make a nice green salad， rounding out a roast chicken dinner. But I ended up working late. Then friends called with a dinner invitation. I stuck the chicken in the freezer. But as days passed， the arugula went bad. Even worse， I had unthinkingly bought way too much; I could have made six salads with what I threw out.

In a world where nearly 800 million people a year go hungry， “food waste goes against the moral grain，” as Elizabeth Royte writes in this months cover story. Its jaw-dropping how much perfectly good food is thrown away?--?from “ugly” （but quite eatable） vegetables rejected by grocers to large amounts of uneaten dishes thrown into restaurant garbage cans.

Producing food that no one eats wastes the water， fuel， and other resources used to grow it. That makes food waste an environmental problem. In fact， Royte writes， “If food waste were a country， it would be the third largest producer of greenhouse gases in the world.”

If thats hard to understand， lets keep it as simple as the arugula at the back of my refrigerator. Mike Curtin sees my arugula story all the time?--??but for him， its more like 12 boxes of donated strawberries nearing their last days. Curtin is CEO of DC Central Kitchen in Washington. D.C.， which recovers food and turns it into healthy meals. Last year it recovered more than 807，500 pounds of food by taking donations and collecting blemished （有瑕疵的） produce that otherwise would have rotted in fields. And the strawberries？ Volunteers will wash， cut， and freeze or dry them for use in meals down the road.

Such methods seem obvious， yet so often we just dont think. “Everyone can play a part in reducing waste， whether by not purchasing more food than necessary in your weekly shopping or by asking restaurants to not include the side dish you wont eat.” Curtin says.

24.What does the author want to show by telling the arugula story？

A. We pay little attention to food waste.

B. We waste food unintentionally at times.

C. We waste more vegetables than meat.

D. We have good reasons for wasting food.

25.What is a consequence of food waste according to the text？

A. Moral decline.__________

B. Environmental harm.

C. Energy shortage.

D. Worldwide starvation.

26.What does Curtins company do？

A. It produces kitchen equipment.

B. It turns rotten arugula into clean fuel.

C. It helps local farmers grow fruits.

D. It makes meals out of unwanted food．

27.What does Curtin suggest people do？

A. Buy only what is needed.

B. Reduce food consumption.

C. Go shopping once a week.

D. Eat in restaurants less often.

文章以作者無意中浪費了芝麻菜為切入點，繼而引出日常浪費食物只是表象，其背后還隱藏著更大的問題——環境污染。與此同時，Mike Curtin則將一些快到期的食物變成健康食品，再捐贈給需要的人。最后作者呼吁大家外出點餐或買食物時，堅持適度原則，不浪費。

24題為推理題，問作者講述芝麻菜的原因是什么。作者表明自己會注意不浪費食物。隨后講到買了芝麻菜等食物，卻因為工作得太晚沒吃。后來又因為有朋友聚餐，于是這些食物被遺忘在冰箱里，到最后芝麻菜變質了。更糟糕的是，作者輕率地（unthinkingly）買了太多的食物，而且那些食物本來可以做成6份沙拉的，但最終只能扔了。另外，第二段的第一句引語直接點出，“food waste goes against the moral grain”。綜上所述，作者講述芝麻菜是為了說明B. We waste food unintentionally at times. （我們有時會在無意中浪費食物）

25題，細節題，問根據文本，浪費食物其中一個結果是什么。根據第三段“That makes food waste an environmental problem.”可知答案為B. Environmental harm．

26題，細節題，問Curtin的公司是做什么的。根據第四段“Curtin is CEO of DC Central Kitchen in Washington. D.C.， which recovers food and turns it into healthy meals. ”（Curtin的公司回收食物并將其轉化為健康餐）可以排除A. It produces kitchen equipment.（生產廚房設備），B. It turns rotten arugula into clean fuel.（把腐爛的芝麻菜轉化為干凈能源），C. It helps local farmers grow fruits.（幫助當地農民種植水果）。至于D. It makes meals out of unwanted food.（用不要的食物做飯），這里的unwanted可以從第四段的具體例子：Last year it recovered more than 807，500 pounds of food by taking donations and collecting blemished （有瑕疵的） produce that otherwise would have rotted in fields.（去年這家公司回收大量的食物，這些食物一些來自捐贈，還收集了一些有瑕疵的農產品，要不然這些食物可能會腐爛在地里）可知他們用來做飯的食物確實是unwanted，確定答案為D。

27題，細節題，問Curtin建議人們做什么。從最后一段Curtin所說的話可知“Everyone can play a part in reducing waste， whether by not purchasing more food than necessary in your weekly shopping or by asking restaurants to not include the side dish you wont eat.” （每個人都可以為減少浪費做出貢獻，要么在你進行每周一次的購物時，購買剛需的食物，要么在點餐時不要點你不吃的食物），因此答案為A. Buy only what is needed．

2018年全國卷D篇

We may think were a culture that gets rid of our worn technology at the first sight of something shiny and new， but a new study shows that we keep using our old devices（裝置）well after they go out of style. Thats bad news for the environment--and our wallets--as these outdated devices consume much more energy than the newer ones that do the same things．

To figure out how much power these devices are using， Callie Babbitt and her colleagues at the Rochester Institute of Technology in New York tracked the environmental costs for each product throughout its life?--?from when its minerals are mined to when we stop using the device. This method provided a readout for how home energy use has evolved since the early 1990s. Devices were grouped by generation. Desktop computers， basic mobile phones， and box-set TVs defined 1992. Digital cameras arrived on the scene in 1997. And MP3 players， smart phones， and LCD TVs entered homes in 2002， before tablets and e-readers showed up in 2007．

As we accumulated more devices， however， we didnt throw out our old ones. “The living-room television is replaced and gets planted in the kids?room， and suddenly one day， you have a TV in every room of the house，” said one researcher. The average number of electronic devices rose from 4 per household in 1992 to 13 in 2007. Were not just keeping these old devices- -we continue to use them. According to the analysis of Babbitts team， old desktop monitors and box TVs with cathode ray tubes are the worst devices with their energy consumption and contribution to greenhouse gas emissions（排放）more than doubling during the 1992 to 2007 window．

So whats the solution（解決方案）？ The teams date only went up to 2007， but the researchers also explored what would happen if consumers replaced old products with new electronics that serve more than one function， such as a tablet for word processing and TV viewing. They found that more on demand environment viewing on tablets instead of TVs and desktop computers could cut energy consumption by 44%．

32. What does the author think of new devices？

A. They are environment-friendly.

B. They are no better than the old．

C. They cost more to use at home.

D. They go out of style quickly．

33. Why did Babbitts team conduct the research？

A. To reduce the cost of minerals.

B. To test the life cycle of a product．

C. To update consumers on new technology.

D. To find out electricity consumption of the devices．

34. Which of the following uses the least energy？

A. The box-set TV.

B. The tablet．

C. The LCD TV.

D. The desktop computer．

35. What does the text suggest people do about old electronic devices？

A. Stop using them.

B. Take them apart．

C. Upgrade them.

D. Recycle them．

本文開篇提出，我們可能認為我們會喜新棄舊，但一份研究表明，現實中我們會繼續用著舊裝置，哪怕它們已經過時了。接著說明Callie Babbitt團隊做研究的目的和結果。而后研究者分析：我們買了新電器后，舊電器依然“植根”于家中，而事實上舊電器會排放出更多溫室氣體。最后一段則是提出解決方案。

32題，觀點態度題，問作者對新裝置（電器）有什么看法。從第一段“Thats bad news for the environment--and our wallets--as these outdated devices consume much more energy than the newer ones that do the same things.”（對環境和我們的錢包都不是好事，同樣的功能，比起新裝置，過時的裝置消耗更多的能源）可知答案為A. They are environment-friendly. 環保。

33題，細節題，問Babbitt團隊做研究的目的。根據第二段第一句”To figure out how much power these devices are using” （為了計算這些裝置會消耗多少能源），可知同義轉化為答案D. To find out electricity consumption of the devices．

34題，細節題，問哪一個（裝備）最節約能源。從最后一段They found that more on-demand environment viewing on tablets instead of TVs and desktop computers could cut energy consumption by 44%.（他們發現多在平板電腦上看點播節目，比使用電視或臺式電腦節省44%的能源），可知答案為B. The tablet．

35題，推理題，問作者建議人們怎么處理舊裝置。從第一段作者已提到有研究表明，舊裝置耗時耗能，而最后一段也說明用平板電腦比用舊裝備更省電，可推理答案為A. Stop using them（停止使用）

兩篇文章，都以日常生活中的“誤區”提出問題：或無意浪費了食物，或無意中浪費了能源；都同樣指出生活中的這些現象，會對環境造成污染；最后都針對問題提出建議。從篇章結構來看，其主題突出，脈絡清晰。

在考題方面，都有一題明確指出生活行為與環境污染的關系，2022年全國I卷，第25題明確指出食物浪費的結果為環境污染，2018年的32題反其道而行，指出使用新裝備節能省錢；言下之意，舊裝置浪費能源。而且文中也明確指出，Babbitt團隊研究結果表明，舊裝置除了浪費能源，還會排放更多的溫室氣體。

除此這外，還有一題是給出建議，2022年全國I卷，第27題，建議人們不要購買太多食物，2018年的35題則建議人們停止使用舊裝置。

文章有別于學生從課本上看到“海洋污染，白色污染”等宏觀的環境問題，而是從“微觀”、貼近生活的問題入手，這提醒了人們環境保護離我們并不遙遠。除了我們經常說的“隨手關燈，節約用水”外，節約食物、（買了新的電器）停止使用舊電器也能保護環境。這些文章旨在提醒大家，環境保護并非只是口號，應該落實行動，從身邊小事做起。

那么面對這類話題的文章，考生又應該如何備考呢？

1. 整體把握篇章。從文章結構來說，這類文章包含三個維度，包含“提出問題（what），分析原因（why）和解決問題（how）”，而考查的重點一般是“what”與“how”兩方面。這也就提醒考生，閱讀此類文章時不妨先把握文章整體結構，再結合問題有針對性地閱讀相關段落。

2. 積累相關英語表達。從這兩篇高考閱讀文章常用的表達來看，考生需要積累相關的語言如下：

problem

浪費waste sth.

溫室氣體greenhouse gas

消耗能量consume energy

solution

減少浪費reduce waste

減少溫室氣體排放reduce greenhouse gas emissions

減少能消耗cut energy consumption

3. 回歸課本，回歸基礎。高考真題是可以從課本內找到“蛛絲馬跡”的。例如從2019版新人教選擇性必修三Unit3 Environmental protection的Reading and thinking一文，我們可以找到不少相似的表達，如：

問題：

（1）There is strong and comprehensive evidence that the rise in temperature has led to an increase in extreme weather and natural disasters， not only causing serious damage， but also costing human lives.（強有力且全面的證據表明，溫度的上升已導致極端天氣和自然災害有所增加，這不僅造成了嚴重的傷害，也造成了人員傷亡。）

（2）Continued greenhouse gas emissions will result in further warming and long-lasting changes to the global climate.（持續排放溫室氣體會導致全球氣候進一步變暖，且變化會更為持久。）

應對措施：

（1）Governments need to consider making policies and taking appropriate actions and measures to reduce greenhouse gas emission.（政府需要考慮制定政策，采取適當的行動和措施來減少溫室氣體排放。）

（2）We as individuals can reduce our “carbon footprint” by restricting the amount of carbon dioxide our lifestyle produce.（我們個人也可以通過限制生活中所產生的二氧化碳來減少“碳足跡”。）

對比高考閱讀文章和課本相關句子的相似性，我認為考生在備考時不必舍近求遠，不妨立足課本，扎實掌握相關的詞匯和句子，這樣當我們遇到相關的表達時，才可能將課內知識遷移應用至課外，以“不變應萬變”。

責任編輯?吳昊雷