READING REVISION - MID-TERM TEST 1

ACADEMIC ENGLISH - UNLOCK 4

1. For many environmentalists, the world seems to be getting worse. run out (v): sự hết cạn
They have developed a hit-list of our main fears: that natural
resources are running out, that the population is ever growing,
leaving less and less to eat, that species are becoming extinct in
vast numbers, and that the planet's air and water are becoming
ever more polluted.
2. But a quick look at the facts shows a different picture. First, energy
and other natural resources have become more abundant, not abundant (adj): dồi dào
less so, since the book 'The Limits to Growth' was published in
1972 by a group of scientists. Second, more food is now produced
per head of the world's population than at any time in history.
Fewer people are starving. Third, although species are indeed
becoming extinct, only about 0.7% of them are expected to
disappear in the next 50 years, not 25-50%, as has so often been
predicted. And finally, most forms of environmental pollution exaggerate (v): làm phóng
either appear to have been exaggerated, or are transient - đại lên
associated with the early phases of industrialisation and therefore transient (adj): tạm thời
best cured not by restricting economic growth, but by
accelerating it. One form of pollution - the release of greenhouse accelerate (v): đẩy nhanh
gases that causes global warming - does appear to be a
phenomenon that is going to extend well into our future, but its
total impact is unlikely to pose a devastating problem. A bigger
problem may well turn out to be an inappropriate response to it.
3. Yet opinion polls suggest that many people nurture the belief that
environmental standards are declining and four factors seem to
cause this disjunction between perception and reality. disjunction (n): sự tách rời
4. One is the lopsidedness built into scientific research. Scientific
funding goes mainly to areas with many problems. That may be
wise policy but it will also create an impression that many more
potential problems exist than is the case.
5. Secondly, environmental groups need to be noticed by the mass
media. They also need to keep the money rolling in.
Understandably, perhaps, they sometimes overstate their
arguments. In 1997, for example, the World Wide Fund for Nature
issued a press release entitled: 'Two-thirds of the world's forests
lost forever'. The truth turns out to be nearer 20%.
6. Though these groups are run overwhelmingly by selfless folk, they
nevertheless share many of the characteristics of other lobby
groups. That would matter less if people applied the same degree
of skepticism to environmental lobbying as they do to lobby
groups in other fields. A trade organization arguing for, say, weaker skepticism (n): sự nghi
pollution control is instantly seen as self-interested. Yet a green hoặc
organization opposing such a weakening is seen as altruistic, even environmental lobbying
if an impartial view of the controls in question might suggest they (n): vận động hành lang về
are doing more harm than good. môi trường
7. A third source of confusion is the attitude of the media. People
are clearly more curious about bad news than good. Newspapers altruistic (adj): có lòng vị
and broadcasters are there to provide what the public wants: tha, biết nghĩ tới người
That, however, can lead to significant distortions of perception. An khác
example was America's encounter with El Niño in 1997 and 1998.
This climatic phenomenon was accused of wrecking tourism,
causing allergies, melting the ski slopes, and causing 22 deaths.
However, according to an article in the Bulletin of the American
Meteorological Society, the damage it did was estimated at US$4 distortion (n): sự bóp méo,
billion but the benefits amounted to some US$19 billion. These biến dạng
came from higher winter temperatures (which saved an estimated
850 lives, reduced heating costs, and diminished spring floods
caused by melt waters).
8. The fourth factor is poor individual perception. People worry that
the endless rise in the amount of stuff everyone throws away will
cause the world to run out of places to dispose of waste. Yet, even
if America's trash output continues to rise as it has done in the
past, and even if the American population doubles by 2100, all the
rubbish America produces through the entire 21st century will still
take up only one-12,000th of the area of the entire United States.
9. So what of global warming? As we know, carbon dioxide emissions
are causing the planet to warm. The best estimates are that the
temperatures will rise by 2-3°C in this century, causing
considerable problems, at a total cost of US$5,000 billion.
10. Despite the intuition that something drastic needs to be done
about such a costly problem, economic analyses clearly show it
will be far more expensive to cut carbon dioxide emissions
radically than to pay the costs of adaptation to the increased
temperatures. A model by one of the main authors of the United adaptation (n): sự thích
Nations Climate Change Panel shows how an expected nghi, việc thích nghi với cái
temperature increase of 2.1 degrees in 2100 would only be gì
diminished to an increase of 1.9 degrees. Or to put it another way,
the temperature increase that the planet would have experienced
in 2094 would be postponed to 2100.
11. So this does not prevent global warming, but merely buys the
world six years. Yet the cost of reducing carbon dioxide emissions,
for the United States alone, will be higher than the cost of solving
the world's single, most pressing health problem: providing
universal access to clean drinking water and sanitation. Such
measures would avoid 2 million deaths every year, and prevent
half a billion people from becoming seriously ill.
12. It is crucial that we look at the facts if we want to make the best
possible decisions for the future. It may be costly to be overly
optimistic - but more costly still to be too pessimistic.

Answer the following questions. Use the words from the reading. Use NO MORE THAN THREE
WORDS for each blank.
1. Environmentalists fear that natural resources are running out.
2. The publication 'The Limits to Growth' was released by a group of scientists in 1972. Ever since
this point, sources of energy as well as natural resources have become way more abundant.
3. Early stages of industrialization are associated with most forms of pollution.
Possible explanations why environmental pollution is not as bad as our perception
4. Scientific research funding tends to focus on areas with many problems. An example is the
report made by the World Wide Fund.
5. Environmental groups sometimes overstate their arguments to gain media attention and funding
from other groups.
6. Media coverage often leads to a distortion of perception about environmental issues, especially
since people are more interested in negative news.
7. Individual perception about waste disposal suggests people fear the world will run out of places
for rubbish.
8. It is argued that cutting carbon dioxide emissions is more expensive than paying for adaptation
to rising temperatures.
9. Providing universal access to clean drinking water could save 2 million lives every year.