2014考研英語：閱讀理解素材分享（五）_跨考網

　　下面，跨考小編為考生們分享幾篇相關閱讀理解文章素材，考生在復習之余，不妨研習一下。>>>考研英語復習備考手冊

　　據美國《連線》雜志報道，本周部分科學家及政府官員將齊聚加利福尼亞州的阿西洛馬，商討地理工程學(geoengineering)在未來是否會對氣候變化帶來不利影響這一議題。然而，如今事實情況是，為了能夠更好的生存，人類在過去已對地球做出了許多地理改造，并且負面效應也已出現。

　　據悉，人類的文明社會,當前社會的一切繁榮、富強、發(fā)展、進步都發(fā)生在全新世(Holocene)。全新世開始于1萬年前，人類為了更好的生存，不斷建設水利、開墾良田、建造城市，并且形成文明。在這個過程中，人類逐漸地對地球進行了各種地理工程改造。全新世對于人類具有十分重要的意義。

　　如今，人類改造地球會造成何種后果還不得而知，但科學家認為，目前全新世已不復存在，人類目前處于人類世 (Anthropocene)。這是一個新的地質紀元，在這個紀元，人類的活動正威脅著地球的自我調節(jié)能力。此外，人類此前對地球所做地理工程學改造已出現弊端。

　　Thegeoengineering genie

　　MasonInman

　　Likeany human endeavour, geoengineering carries hefty doses of uncertainty, doubtand fear.

　　Howto Cool the Planet: Geoengineering and the Audacious(大膽的，無畏的) Quest to Fix Earth's Climate by Jeff Goodell

　　Onlya couple of years ago, geoengineering seemed like science fiction. Somescientists talked about cooling the planet using massive shields to reflectsunlight back into space or by loading the atmosphere with aerosols(汽霧劑 ['??r?s?l]), but few thought of theseplanetary-scale projects as real contenders(競爭者) foraverting climate catastrophe. But — perhaps because thechallenge of mitigation(緩和，減輕) is now fully recognized — geoengineering has gone mainstream. Increasingly, scientists areturning their attention to it: last month at the Asilomar conference centre inMonterey, California, experts met for the first time to consider how the fieldcan be regulated. Meanwhile, governments are holding parliamentary hearings onthe subject and venture capitalists are looking to it as an investmentopportunity.

　　“I don't especially want to work on geoengineering. But now that thegenie is out of the bottle, I feel I have to,” saysclimate modeller Raymond Pierrehumbert of the University of Chicago in EliKintisch's “Hack the Planet”,one of the first books to cover this burgeoning (['b?:d??ni?]增長迅速的,發(fā)展很快的)subject for apopular audience. Though potentially capable of rapidly reducing temperatures,the numerous technologies that come under the geoengineering umbrella wouldprobably have unintended — and potentially disastrous — consequences. Despite its promise and perils(危險，冒險), however, geoengineering is a virtual(['v?:tju?l]事實上的,實際上的,實質上的 )unknown among the general public, so Kintisch's book and another,Jeff Goodell's “How to Cool the Planet”, both published this month, have come at a crucial time. These twofast-paced tours through the science of geoengineering will help inform growingdebates about whether governments should fund large research projects intoclimatic cooling and about how the various methods might be tested.

　　BothGoodell and Kintisch make it clear that geoengineering is at best(充其量，至多)a complement to drastic cuts in carbon dioxide emissions. “We have to immediately launch a worldwide program to stop pollutingour atmosphere with this surprisingly pernicious(有害的,有毒的;惡性的,致命的)trace gas,” Kintisch argues. Most scientists feel much the same, viewinggeoengineering strictly as a possible emergency backup plan that should be usedonly if things get really dire. And because of the risks involved, the idea ofdoing field trials, especially of technologies for so-called 'solar radiationmanagement' — that is, blocking out sunlight in one wayor another — is still contentious(愛爭論的，有異議的;引起爭論的)among scientists. But Goodell makes astrong argument in favour of at least some limited tests. He tells the tale ofCharles Hatfield, a travelling rainmaker who won acclaim across the UnitedStates in the early 1900s. When Hatfield tried to bring rain to San Diego andtorrential(奔流的;猛烈的;洶涌的)floods ensued( [in?sju:]接著發(fā)生，接踵而來，因而產生), he was hounded out of the city, his reputation in tatters(衣衫襤褸的;被粉碎的;徹底破產的). With geoengineering, writesGoodell, “it might be smart to begin sorting good ideasfrom bad, lest we fall under the spell of another generation of CharlesHatfields”. That is, if we do the research, thenperhaps we'll decide that some methods are best forgotten.

　　Hackthe Planet: Science's Best Hope — or Worst Nightmare — for Averting Climate Catastrophe by Eli Kintisch

　　Dangerousjourney

　　Forthe time being, however, all of the existing plans and proposals are just “armchair geoengineering”, as Kintisch putsit. And the cast of armchair geoengineers is still very small. The result isthat both books cover a lot of the same ideas and quote many of the samesources, and both have in-depth chapters about two particular options:fertilizing the oceans with iron, and ships spewing cloud-brighteningparticles. Kintisch's book, though, offers up more examples of geoengineering.One is a proposition by the nonprofit Ice911, started by California-basedengineer Leslie Field, to protect sea ice from melting by covering it withsacks full of silicon beads. Another is a scheme put forward by atmosphericscientist Brian Toon, who proposes modifying coal-fired power plants to belchthe chemical carbonyl sulphide at ground level, from where, Toon figures, itwill eventually be carried up to the stratosphere(['str?t?usfi?]【氣】同溫層;平流層) and turn intolight-reflecting sulphates.

　　Kintischalso digs deeper than Goodell into explaining the details of how geoengineeringmight work — and why it would be so difficult to dowell. A reporter for the journal Science who regularly covers geoengineeringfor the journal's ScienceInsider blog, Kintisch likewise takes an insider'sview in Hack the Planet. That's not to say Kintisch argues in favour ofgeoengineering, but that he writes from firmly within the world of science, andfor an audience who's comfortable with science, too. He never explains the term'hack' in the title, for example, which is borrowed from computer hacking andreflects the idea that geoengineering involves interfering with fundamental aspectsof the climate to change how the whole system works. For this reason,scientists and other science-literate readers —especially those who already have some familiarity with geoengineering — will probably prefer Kintisch's book over Goodell's.

　　Incontrast, Goodell's book takes a step back, presenting an outsider's view —unsurprising, as he is a regular reporter for Rolling Stone, themusic and politics magazine. This perspective allows Goodell to be a guide tothose who might reject the whole idea of geoengineering as far-fetched orcrazy. “You don't need a Ph.D. in physics to understandthe basic insanity of this undertaking,” Goodellwrites, while emphasizing that the outlook for the planet is so bad that wehave to think about these options anyway. Of the two authors, Goodell does abetter job of taking the reader on a journey. Most chapters in How to Cool thePlanet feature a central character, from geoengineer David Keith tinkering inhis lab at the University of Calgary to environmentalist and scientist JamesLovelock strolling the countryside around his quaint English home. By digginginto their stories, Goodell portrays geoengineering as a human endeavour,carrying hefty doses of uncertainty, doubt and fear.

　　Itwhat seems to be an odd coincidence, both books end by likening geoengineeringto some kind of planetary gardening. Goodell takes some comfort in this notion,whereas Kintisch is sceptical about the idea that we can tame and controlecosystems, let alone the whole planet. To my mind, a better analogy(比擬，類比，類推)for geoengineering would be industrial agriculture, with vastfeedlots(飼育場)and fields of crops planted and harvestedby machines. This system works for now, but its sustainability is increasinglycoming into question. Similarly, geoengineering might appear to work well for awhile before its dark side becomes evident. As Princeton University's RobertSocolow recently told the Asilomar meeting: “Be verycareful.” Geoengineering comes with some strongwarnings, and they're worth heeding.

　　更多內容請進入：考研英語復習頻道

　　專題推薦：考研必備知識手冊

　　研招信息：考研院校信息總匯