Is there enough oil beneath the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (保護(hù)區(qū)) (ANWR) to help secure America’s energy future? President Bush certainly thinks so. He has argued that tapping ANWR’s oil would help ease California’s electricity crisis and provide a major boost to the country’s energy independence. But no one knows for sure how much crude oil lies buried beneath the frozen earth with the last government survey, conducted in 1998, projecting output anywhere from 3 billion to 16 billion barrels.

　　The oil industry goes with the high end of the range, which could equal as much as 10% of U.S. consumption for as long as six years. By pumping more than 1 million barrels a day from the reserve for the next two or three decades, lobbyists claim, the nation could cut back on imports equivalent to all shipments to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia sounds good. An oil boom would also mean a multibillion-dollar windfall(意外之財)in tax revenues, royalties(開采權(quán)使用費)and leasing fees for Alaska and the Federal Government. Best of all, advocates of drilling say, damage to the environment would be insignificant. “We’ve never had a document case of oil rig chasing deer out onto the pack ice.” says Alaska State Representative Scott Ogan.

　　Not so far, say environmentalists. Sticking to the low end of government estimates, the National Resources Defense Council says there may be no more than 3.2 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil in the coastal plain of ANWR, a drop in the bucket that would do virtually nothing to ease America’s energy problems. And consumers would wait up to a decade to gain any benefits, because drilling could begin only after much bargaining over leases, environmental permits and regulatory review. As for ANWR’s impact on the California power crisis, environmentalists point out that oil is responsible for only 1% of the Golden State’s electricity output –and just 3% of the nation’s.

　　1. What does President Bush think of tapping oil in ANWR?

　　A. It will exhaust the nation’s oil reserves.

　　B. It will help secure the future of ANWR.

　　C. It will help reduce the nation’s oil imports.

　　D. It will increase America’s energy consumption.

　　2. We learn from the second paragraph that the American oil industry ______.

　　A. believes that drilling for oil in ANWR will produce high yields

　　B. tends to exaggerate America’s reliance on foreign oil

　　C. shows little interest in tapping oil in ANWR

　　D. expects to stop oil imports from Saudi Arabia

　　3. Those against oil drilling in ANWR argue that ______.

　　A. it can cause serious damage to the environment

　　B. it can do little to solve U.S. energy problems

　　C. it will drain the oil reserves in the Alaskan region

　　D. it will not have much commercial value

　　4. What do the environmentalists mean by saying “Not so fast” (Line 1, Para .3)?

　　A. Oil exploitation takes a long time

　　B. The oil drilling should be delayed

　　C. Don’t be too optimistic

　　D. Don’t expect fast returns

　　5. It can be learned from the passage that oil exploitation beneath ANWR’s frozen earth ______.

　　A. remains a controversial issue

　　B. is expected to get under way soon

　　C. involves a lot of technological problems

　　D. will enable the U.S. to be oil independent

　　答案及解析：

　　本文探討了美國北極國家野外保護(hù)區(qū)的石油是否應(yīng)該開采的問題，文章介紹了支持者和 反對者對此問題的不同觀點。

　　1. C。細(xì)節(jié)題。由題干中的tapping oil in ANWR 定位到文章第一段第三句“布什認(rèn)為這樣做可以緩解加州的電力危機(jī)，促進(jìn)國家的能源獨立性”。句中的provide a major boost to the country's energy independence 與 C 項中的 help reduce the nation's oil imports 是同義轉(zhuǎn)述。

　　2. A。推斷題。從第二段首句The oil industry goes with the high end of the range 中可以看出石油界對在北極國家野生動物保護(hù)區(qū)開采石油的積極性非常高，認(rèn)為該地區(qū)能采出很高的油量。事實上，第二段中接下來提到的支持者的觀點能夠說明石油界的態(tài)度。作者在第二段第四句指出“石油繁榮還意味著阿拉斯加州和聯(lián)邦政府會在稅收收入、開采權(quán)使用費和租賃費用方面獲得幾十億美元的意外之財”。由此可見石油界認(rèn)為在該地區(qū)開采石油會有高回報。

　　3. B。細(xì)節(jié)題。在第三段中第二句作者指出 a drop in the buket that would do virtually nothing to ease America's energy problems ，B項中的can do little to solve 是原文的同義轉(zhuǎn)述。

　　4. C。語義題。Not so fast 出現(xiàn)在第三段。文章第二段提到了石油開采支持者的樂觀看法;他們認(rèn)為開采石油的巨大經(jīng)濟(jì)利益還沒有體現(xiàn)出來。第三段作者提出反對石油開采的環(huán)保主義者的觀點：ANWR的石油開采量根本無法緩解美國的能源問題。由此可知 Not so fast 應(yīng)該是反對石油開采的環(huán)保主義者的觀點，即否定支持者開采石油的樂觀態(tài)度。

　　5. A。推斷題。本文開篇提到美國北極國家野外保護(hù)區(qū)石油開采問題，第二段中作者指出支持者的觀點，第三段中指出反對者的觀點，最后作者也沒有給出爭論的結(jié)果。這說明該地區(qū)的石油開采問題是一個有爭議的話題。

    考前須知：申碩考試時間安排 ♦準(zhǔn)考證下載入口 ♦英語寫作模板匯總 ♦歷年同等學(xué)力真題

    入門須知：什么是在職研究生 ♦在職讀研六大方式 ♦在職研報考條件 ♦讀在職研有用嗎