单选题 0分

Text 4 Visiting Oxford Street, a rwd fiUing wilh tatty shop, and overcrowded with people, is pla...

Text 4
Visiting Oxford Street, a rwd fiUing wilh tatty shop, and overcrowded with people, is plainly a trial. Less plainly, levels of nitrogen dioxide ( NO2) , a noxious gas, have been found to be around three times higher there Lhan the legal limit. In 2013 the annual mean concentration of N02 0n the street was one of the highest levels found anywhere in Europe.
British air is far cleaner than it was a few decades ago. Fewer people use coal-burning stoves; old industrial plants have been decommissioned. But since 2009 levels of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter, coarse or fine particles that are linked to lung cancer and asthma, have fallen more slowly. The exact iiumber of deaths caused by dirty air is unknown. But in 2010 a govemment advisory group estimated that removing man-made fine particulate matter from the atmosphere woulcl in crease life expeclancy for ihose born in 2008 by an average of six months.
Much of the slowdown is the result of fumes from diesel cars, which were championed by successive governments because they use less fuel and thus produce less carbon dioxide than petrol cars. In 2001 0nly 14% 0f all cars ran on diesel; by 2013 the proportion had increased t0 35%.( Greener " hybrid" and elecLric cars have increased nine fold since 2006, but account for just 0. 5% of the entire fleet. ) Second-hand cars are particularly noxious, but even newer ones have not been as clean as hoped. Many cars that let out few pollutants in tests procluced more on the roads.
Government's hesitation has not helped. Part of the problem is that several departmenLs are responsible for air pollution. This means nobody has taken a lead on it, complains Joan Walley, a Labour MP who chairs an environmental committee that has released a series of damning reports. And few politicians are keen to fire drivers.
However, some improvements have been made. In 2008 a "low-enussion zone" was created in London, which targets large vans and coaches. A smaller "uhra low-enussion zone" has been proposed for 2020, which would charge all vehicles that are not of a certain standard 12. 50 pounds a day. European Comnussion fines for breaching limits may encourage cities to do more. But oLher countries are more ambitious: 60 such zones exist in Germany, targeting private cars as well as vans. In December Anne Hidalgo, the mayor of Paris, announced that she wanted to ban diesel cars by 2020.
39. Govemments try to reduce air pollution by
  • A. imposing extra taxes on vehicles
  • B. setiing "no-emission zone" for cars
  • C. cutting iail gas emission of vehicles
  • D. encouraging people not to drive cars

你可能感兴趣的试题

1 单选题 0分
Retrofitting houses to use less energy should be a no-brainer for homeowners. I time,money spent on ways to reduce heat loss from drauShty houses should produce a 2 return in lower fuel bills. In practice, many are cauLious. Some improvements, such as solid-wall insulation and solar panels, can take over 25 years to 3 their initial cost. Few owners are willing to wait that long: by then many are likely to have . 4 and moved on.
Several governments have started finance schemes designed t0 5 this problem. Since 2008 PACE programmes have offered American homeowners loans to 6 . improvements, repaid through higher local taxes on the property, 7 it belongs to. In Brit.ain, Lhe Green Deal offers loans over a 25-year period, with repayments added to energy bills. Countnes including France and Canada have similar 8 .
In theory, these schemes should boost investment in common energy-saving measures, such as extra insulation and new boilers, 9 the first owner does not have to pay all the costs in advance. But enrolment rates have 10 , according to Sean Kidney at the Climate Bonds Initiative, a thinktank. In Britain, just 1% of those assessed for the Creen Deal have signed up. In Berkeley, California, home of the first PACE scheme, the 11 rate is similarly low.
Homeowners are 12 chiefly because the interest raLes on the loans look high. The Green Deal charges 7%; some PACE schemes a hefty 8%. As these rates are fixed for decades, they will 13 look unattractive when (as now) short-term interest rates are low.
Many people als0 14 they will save enough on their energy biUs to cover the repayments. For instance, 15 in Britain that installing loft insulation can cut energy bills by 20% have been dented by a government study that found it 16 gas consumption by only l.7% on average. Others fear that green loans may reduce the value of their home. In America, firms that undewrite mortgages are 17 PACE loans.
Green loans have not been a failure everywhere. Around 250,000 households in Germany 18 for them each year. They do s0 19 they need pay only 1% interest on them each yeu, thanks to an annual public subsidy of l.5 billion. Whether that is a(an) 20 use of taxpayers'money is another question.
  • A. On
  • B. In
  • C. Over
  • D. At
2 单选题 0分
Retrofitting houses to use less energy should be a no-brainer for homeowners. I time,money spent on ways to reduce heat loss from drauShty houses should produce a 2 return in lower fuel bills. In practice, many are cauLious. Some improvements, such as solid-wall insulation and solar panels, can take over 25 years to 3 their initial cost. Few owners are willing to wait that long: by then many are likely to have . 4 and moved on.
Several governments have started finance schemes designed t0 5 this problem. Since 2008 PACE programmes have offered American homeowners loans to 6 . improvements, repaid through higher local taxes on the property, 7 it belongs to. In Brit.ain, Lhe Green Deal offers loans over a 25-year period, with repayments added to energy bills. Countnes including France and Canada have similar 8 .
In theory, these schemes should boost investment in common energy-saving measures, such as extra insulation and new boilers, 9 the first owner does not have to pay all the costs in advance. But enrolment rates have 10 , according to Sean Kidney at the Climate Bonds Initiative, a thinktank. In Britain, just 1% of those assessed for the Creen Deal have signed up. In Berkeley, California, home of the first PACE scheme, the 11 rate is similarly low.
Homeowners are 12 chiefly because the interest raLes on the loans look high. The Green Deal charges 7%; some PACE schemes a hefty 8%. As these rates are fixed for decades, they will 13 look unattractive when (as now) short-term interest rates are low.
Many people als0 14 they will save enough on their energy biUs to cover the repayments. For instance, 15 in Britain that installing loft insulation can cut energy bills by 20% have been dented by a government study that found it 16 gas consumption by only l.7% on average. Others fear that green loans may reduce the value of their home. In America, firms that undewrite mortgages are 17 PACE loans.
Green loans have not been a failure everywhere. Around 250,000 households in Germany 18 for them each year. They do s0 19 they need pay only 1% interest on them each yeu, thanks to an annual public subsidy of l.5 billion. Whether that is a(an) 20 use of taxpayers'money is another question.
  • A. handsome
  • B. delicate
  • C. splendid
  • D. trivial
3 单选题 0分
Retrofitting houses to use less energy should be a no-brainer for homeowners. I time,money spent on ways to reduce heat loss from drauShty houses should produce a 2 return in lower fuel bills. In practice, many are cauLious. Some improvements, such as solid-wall insulation and solar panels, can take over 25 years to 3 their initial cost. Few owners are willing to wait that long: by then many are likely to have . 4 and moved on.
Several governments have started finance schemes designed t0 5 this problem. Since 2008 PACE programmes have offered American homeowners loans to 6 . improvements, repaid through higher local taxes on the property, 7 it belongs to. In Brit.ain, Lhe Green Deal offers loans over a 25-year period, with repayments added to energy bills. Countnes including France and Canada have similar 8 .
In theory, these schemes should boost investment in common energy-saving measures, such as extra insulation and new boilers, 9 the first owner does not have to pay all the costs in advance. But enrolment rates have 10 , according to Sean Kidney at the Climate Bonds Initiative, a thinktank. In Britain, just 1% of those assessed for the Creen Deal have signed up. In Berkeley, California, home of the first PACE scheme, the 11 rate is similarly low.
Homeowners are 12 chiefly because the interest raLes on the loans look high. The Green Deal charges 7%; some PACE schemes a hefty 8%. As these rates are fixed for decades, they will 13 look unattractive when (as now) short-term interest rates are low.
Many people als0 14 they will save enough on their energy biUs to cover the repayments. For instance, 15 in Britain that installing loft insulation can cut energy bills by 20% have been dented by a government study that found it 16 gas consumption by only l.7% on average. Others fear that green loans may reduce the value of their home. In America, firms that undewrite mortgages are 17 PACE loans.
Green loans have not been a failure everywhere. Around 250,000 households in Germany 18 for them each year. They do s0 19 they need pay only 1% interest on them each yeu, thanks to an annual public subsidy of l.5 billion. Whether that is a(an) 20 use of taxpayers'money is another question.
  • A. estimate
  • B. spend
  • C. evaluale
  • D. cover
4 单选题 0分
Retrofitting houses to use less energy should be a no-brainer for homeowners. I time,money spent on ways to reduce heat loss from drauShty houses should produce a 2 return in lower fuel bills. In practice, many are cauLious. Some improvements, such as solid-wall insulation and solar panels, can take over 25 years to 3 their initial cost. Few owners are willing to wait that long: by then many are likely to have . 4 and moved on.
Several governments have started finance schemes designed t0 5 this problem. Since 2008 PACE programmes have offered American homeowners loans to 6 . improvements, repaid through higher local taxes on the property, 7 it belongs to. In Brit.ain, Lhe Green Deal offers loans over a 25-year period, with repayments added to energy bills. Countnes including France and Canada have similar 8 .
In theory, these schemes should boost investment in common energy-saving measures, such as extra insulation and new boilers, 9 the first owner does not have to pay all the costs in advance. But enrolment rates have 10 , according to Sean Kidney at the Climate Bonds Initiative, a thinktank. In Britain, just 1% of those assessed for the Creen Deal have signed up. In Berkeley, California, home of the first PACE scheme, the 11 rate is similarly low.
Homeowners are 12 chiefly because the interest raLes on the loans look high. The Green Deal charges 7%; some PACE schemes a hefty 8%. As these rates are fixed for decades, they will 13 look unattractive when (as now) short-term interest rates are low.
Many people als0 14 they will save enough on their energy biUs to cover the repayments. For instance, 15 in Britain that installing loft insulation can cut energy bills by 20% have been dented by a government study that found it 16 gas consumption by only l.7% on average. Others fear that green loans may reduce the value of their home. In America, firms that undewrite mortgages are 17 PACE loans.
Green loans have not been a failure everywhere. Around 250,000 households in Germany 18 for them each year. They do s0 19 they need pay only 1% interest on them each yeu, thanks to an annual public subsidy of l.5 billion. Whether that is a(an) 20 use of taxpayers'money is another question.
  • A. taken off
  • B. sold up
  • C. turned around
  • D. shut down