高考阅读题中的环境保护

罗丽雯

環境保护是不会过时的话题。但环境保护除了那些看上去“高大上”的事情，例如水资源、森林资源保护等，还有近在咫尺的“身边小事”。在2022年、2018年的全国I卷中，出题老师挑选的文本，讲的正是这些容易被忽略的小事，那这两套题有什么相似之处呢？下面我们看一下这两篇阅读。

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.

文章以作者无意中浪費了芝麻菜为切入点，继而引出日常浪费食物只是表象，其背后还隐藏着更大的问题——环境污染。与此同时，Mike Curtin则将一些快到期的食物变成健康食品，再捐赠给需要的人。最后作者呼吁大家外出点餐或买食物时，坚持适度原则，不浪费。

24题为推理题，问作者讲述芝麻菜的原因是什么。作者表明自己会注意不浪费食物。随后讲到买了芝麻菜等食物，却因为工作得太晚没吃。后来又因为有朋友聚餐，于是这些食物被遗忘在冰箱里，到最后芝麻菜变质了。更糟糕的是，作者轻率地（unthinkingly）买了太多的食物，而且那些食物本来可以做成6份沙拉的，但最终只能扔了。另外，第二段的第一句引语直接点出，“food waste goes against the moral grain”。综上所述，作者讲述芝麻菜是为了说明B. We waste food unintentionally at times. （我们有时会在无意中浪费食物）

25题，细节题，问根据文本，浪费食物其中一个结果是什么。根据第三段“That makes food waste an environmental problem.”可知答案为B. Environmental harm．

26题，细节题，问Curtin的公司是做什么的。根据第四段“Curtin is CEO of DC Central Kitchen in Washington. D.C.， which recovers food and turns it into healthy meals. ”（Curtin的公司回收食物并将其转化为健康餐）可以排除A. It produces kitchen equipment.（生产厨房设备），B. It turns rotten arugula into clean fuel.（把腐烂的芝麻菜转化为干净能源），C. It helps local farmers grow fruits.（帮助当地农民种植水果）。至于D. It makes meals out of unwanted food.（用不要的食物做饭），这里的unwanted可以从第四段的具体例子：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.（去年这家公司回收大量的食物，这些食物一些来自捐赠，还收集了一些有瑕疵的农产品，要不然这些食物可能会腐烂在地里）可知他们用来做饭的食物确实是unwanted，确定答案为D。

27题，细节题，问Curtin建议人们做什么。从最后一段Curtin所说的话可知“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.” （每个人都可以为减少浪费做出贡献，要么在你进行每周一次的购物时，购买刚需的食物，要么在点餐时不要点你不吃的食物），因此答案为A. Buy only what is needed．

2018年全国卷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（装置）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（解决方案）？ 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，我们可能认为我们会喜新弃旧，但一份研究表明，现实中我们会继续用着旧装置，哪怕它们已经过时了。接着说明Callie Babbitt团队做研究的目的和结果。而后研究者分析：我们买了新电器后，旧电器依然“植根”于家中，而事实上旧电器会排放出更多温室气体。最后一段则是提出解决方案。

32题，观点态度题，问作者对新装置（电器）有什么看法。从第一段“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.”（对环境和我们的钱包都不是好事，同样的功能，比起新装置，过时的装置消耗更多的能源）可知答案为A. They are environment-friendly. 环保。

33题，细节题，问Babbitt团队做研究的目的。根据第二段第一句”To figure out how much power these devices are using” （为了计算这些装置会消耗多少能源），可知同义转化为答案D. To find out electricity consumption of the devices．

34题，细节题，问哪一个（装备）最节约能源。从最后一段They found that more on-demand environment viewing on tablets instead of TVs and desktop computers could cut energy consumption by 44%.（他们发现多在平板电脑上看点播节目，比使用电视或台式电脑节省44%的能源），可知答案为B. The tablet．

35题，推理题，问作者建议人们怎么处理旧装置。从第一段作者已提到有研究表明，旧装置耗时耗能，而最后一段也说明用平板电脑比用旧装备更省电，可推理答案为A. Stop using them（停止使用）

两篇文章，都以日常生活中的“误区”提出问题：或无意浪费了食物，或无意中浪费了能源；都同样指出生活中的这些现象，会对环境造成污染；最后都针对问题提出建议。从篇章结构来看，其主题突出，脉络清晰。

在考题方面，都有一题明确指出生活行为与环境污染的关系，2022年全国I卷，第25题明确指出食物浪费的结果为环境污染，2018年的32题反其道而行，指出使用新装备节能省钱；言下之意，旧装置浪费能源。而且文中也明确指出，Babbitt团队研究结果表明，旧装置除了浪费能源，还会排放更多的温室气体。

除此这外，还有一题是给出建议，2022年全国I卷，第27题，建议人们不要购买太多食物，2018年的35题则建议人们停止使用旧装置。

文章有别于学生从课本上看到“海洋污染，白色污染”等宏观的环境问题，而是从“微观”、贴近生活的问题入手，这提醒了人们环境保护离我们并不遥远。除了我们经常说的“随手关灯，节约用水”外，节约食物、（买了新的电器）停止使用旧电器也能保护环境。这些文章旨在提醒大家，环境保护并非只是口号，应该落实行动，从身边小事做起。

那么面对这类话题的文章，考生又应该如何备考呢？

1. 整体把握篇章。从文章结构来说，这类文章包含三个维度，包含“提出问题（what），分析原因（why）和解决问题（how）”，而考查的重点一般是“what”与“how”两方面。这也就提醒考生，阅读此类文章时不妨先把握文章整体结构，再结合问题有针对性地阅读相关段落。

2. 积累相关英语表达。从这两篇高考阅读文章常用的表达来看，考生需要积累相关的语言如下：

problem

浪费waste sth.

温室气体greenhouse gas

消耗能量consume energy

solution

减少浪费reduce waste

减少温室气体排放reduce greenhouse gas emissions

减少能消耗cut energy consumption

3. 回归课本，回归基础。高考真题是可以从课本内找到“蛛丝马迹”的。例如从2019版新人教选择性必修三Unit3 Environmental protection的Reading and thinking一文，我们可以找到不少相似的表达，如：

问题：

（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.（强有力且全面的证据表明，温度的上升已导致极端天气和自然灾害有所增加，这不仅造成了严重的伤害，也造成了人员伤亡。）

（2）Continued greenhouse gas emissions will result in further warming and long-lasting changes to the global climate.（持续排放温室气体会导致全球气候进一步变暖，且变化会更为持久。）

应对措施：

（1）Governments need to consider making policies and taking appropriate actions and measures to reduce greenhouse gas emission.（政府需要考虑制定政策，采取适当的行动和措施来减少温室氣体排放。）

（2）We as individuals can reduce our “carbon footprint” by restricting the amount of carbon dioxide our lifestyle produce.（我们个人也可以通过限制生活中所产生的二氧化碳来减少“碳足迹”。）

对比高考阅读文章和课本相关句子的相似性，我认为考生在备考时不必舍近求远，不妨立足课本，扎实掌握相关的词汇和句子，这样当我们遇到相关的表达时，才可能将课内知识迁移应用至课外，以“不变应万变”。

责任编辑 吴昊雷