In their book Time to Eat the Dog: The Real Guide to Sustainable Living, Robert and Brenda Vale say
keeping a medium-sized dog has the same ecological impact as driving 10000 km a year in a 4.6 liter Land
Cruiser.
"We"re not actually saying it is time to eat the dog. We"re just saying that we need to think about and
know the ecological impact of some of the things we do and that we take for granted."
Constructing and driving the jeep for a year requires 0.41 hectares of land, while growing and
manufacturing a dog"s food takes about O.84 hectares-or l.1 hectares in the case of a large dog such as a
German shepherd.
Convincing flesh-eating cats and dogs to go vegetarian for the sake of the planet is a non-starter, the
Vales say. Instead they recommend keeping "greener", smaller, and more sustainable pets, such as goldfish,
chickens or rabbits.
The book"s playful title, and serious suggestion that pet animals may be usefully "recycled", by being eaten
by their owners or turned into pet food when they die, may not appeal to animal fans.
Annoying as the idea may be, the question is valid given the planet"s growing population and limited resource
s, Robert Vale said.
"Issues about sustainability are increasingly becoming things that are going to require us to make choices
which are as difficult as eating your dog. It"s not just about changing your light bulbs or taking a cloth bag to
the supermarket," he said.
"It"s about much more challenging and difficult issues," he added. "Once you see where cats and dogs fit
in your overall balance of things, you might decide to have the cat but not also to have the two cars and the
three bathrooms and be a meat eater yourself."
B. create a vivid image
C. show writing skills
D. arouse people"s concern
B. the neglected ecological impact
C. some familiar examples
D. some actual figures
B. Raising cats and dogs.
C. Using a cloth bag.
D. Keeping a greener life.
B. Drivers.
C. Animal fans.
D. The authorities.
B. Inspiring.
C. Inviting.
D. Touching.
health of your oil can be related to how you use it too.
Each type of oil has what is called a "smoke point". The smoke point is the specific temperature at which
the oil starts to break down, or in more technical terms, its molecular structure begins to change. These
molecular changes result in changes in flavor, as well as changes in nutritional value, specifically, the nutritional
value of the oil starts to reduce; changing what once may have been considered an especially healthy oil, like
Olive, into one that is unhealthy.
The higher an oil"s smoke point is, the higher the temperature of the oil can be. As a result, each type of oil
should be used for the cooking method that is most appropriate to its individual smoke point and heat tolerance.
Here is a quick guide for the next time you reach for your favorite oil.
Note that the above table represents oils that are refined (精烁). Most oils we buy are refined. Refined oils
tend to have much higher smoke points than when they are unrefined. They also differ in nutrition and flavor,
Unrefined oils are more nutritious and they tend to be much richer in flavor.
When it comes to extremely high heat cooking, always choose oils which are refined.
B. Its smoke point.
C. Its molecular.
D. How you use it.
B. Safflower oil.
C. Unrefined olive oil.
D. Sunflower oil.
B. it is heated well beyond its smoke point
C. it is refined
D. its flavor is changed
B. oils"value depends on their smoke points
C. "certain oils are healthier" is relative
D. oils" flavor and nutrition are connected
and mental well-being, according to a Canadian study.
For years studies have shown people in lower-status jobs generally have higher mtes of heart disease
and other illnesses and die earlier than those in higher-status positions while job authority has shown no
relationship with workers" health.
But University of Toronto researchers, using data from l, 800 US workers, found the health of people
in higher positions is affected by work as they are rnore likely to report conflicts with co-workers and say
work disturbs their home life.
However the positive aspects of having a power position at work, such as higher status, more pay and
greater indeperldence, seemed to cancel out the negative aspects when it came to people"s physical and
psychological health.
These latest findings, reported in the journal Social Science & Medicine, suggest that the advantages
and disadvantages authority positions basically cancel each other out, giving the general impression that job
authority has no health effects.
For the study, the researchers surveyed participants about various aspects of thelr work, life and well-
being. Job authority was judged based on whether a person nlanaged other employees and had power over
hiring, firing and pay.
Physical health complaints included problems like headaches, body aches, heartburn and tiredness.
Psychological complaints included sleep problems, difficulty concentrating and feelings of sadness, worry
and anxiety.
"This isn"t to suggest that having authority is "bad"-in fact, we show it has benefits…but lt is lmportant
to identify the negative sides and deal with them," researcher Scott schieman said.
Schieman said conflicts with co-workers or involvement of work into home life may destroy physical
and mental well-being by creating stress.
"These are key stressors that can tax individuals" ability to function effectively," Schieman said.
B. they have power over hiring and pay
C. they are faced with severe competition
D. they don"t get on well with their co-workers
B. they have enough money to keep themselves healthy
C. their problems are quite different from those of workers
D. the advantages and disadvantages of their status work against each other
B. remind the boss to deal with bad effects of their work
C. show that having authority is harmful to one"s health
D. prove that being a boss can benefit a 1ot
B. Authority can affect health
C. Positive aspects of a power position
D. Disadvantages of being a boss
WHY BURN WASTE?
Waste-to-energy plants generate (产生) enough electricity to supply 2.4 million households in the US. But,
provrding electricity is not the major advantage of waste-to-energy plants. In fact, it costs more to generate
electrlcity at a waste-to-energy plant than it does at a coal, nuclear, or hydropower plant.
The maior advantage of burning waste is that it considerably reduces the amount of trash going to landfills.
The average American produces more than l,600 pounds of waste a year. If all this waste were landfilled, it
would take more than two cubic yards of landfill space. That"s the volume of a box three feet long, three feet
wide, and six feet high. If that waste were burned, the ashes would fit into a box three feet long, three feet
wide, but only nine inches high!
Some communities in the Northeast may be running out of land for new landfills. And, since most people
don"t want landfills in their backyards, it has become more difficult to obtain permits to build new landfms.
Taking the country as a whole, the United States has plenty of open space, of course, but it is expensive to
transport garbage a long distance to put it mto a landfill.
TO BURN OR NOT TO BURN?
Some people are concerned that burning garbage may harm the environment. Like coal plants, waste-to-
energy plants produce air pollution when the fuel is bumed to produce steam or electricity. Burning garbage
releases the chemicals and substances found in the waste. Some chemicals can be a threat to people, the
environment, or both, if they are not properly controlled.
Some critics of waste-to-energy plants are afraid that burning waste will hamper (妨碍, 阻碍) recycling
programs. If everyone sends their trash to a waste-to-energy plant, they say, there will be little motive to
recycle. Several states have considered or are cons idering banning waste-to-energy plants unless recycling
programs are in place. Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York City have delayed new waste-to-energy
plants, hoping to increase the level of recycling first.
So, what"s the real story? Can recycling and burning waste coexist? At first glance, recycling and waste-
to-energy seem to be at odds (不一致), but they can actually complement (弥补) each other. That"s because
it makes good sense to recycle some materials, and better sense to burn others.
Let"s look at aluminum, for example. Aluminum mineral is so expensive to mine that recycling aluminum
more than pays for itself. Burning it produces no energy. So clearly, aluminum is valuable to recycle and not
useful to burn.
Paper, on the other hand, can either be burned or recycled-it all depends on the price the used paper will
bring. Plastics are another matter. Because plastics are made from petroleum and natural gas, they are excellent
sources of energy for waste-to-energy plants. This is especially true since plastics are not as easy to recycle
as steel, aluminum, or paper.
Plastics almost always have to be hand sorted and making a product from recycled plastics may cost more
than making it from new materials.
To burn or not to burn is not really the question. We should use both recycling and waste-to-energy as
alternatives to landfilling.
| As AH1N1 flu continues to spread, experts from the World Health Organization are calling for everyone to practice smart flu prevention techniques. Besides washing your hands and getting enough sleep, here are the other 7 ways to keep your body strong and your immune (免疫) system ready to fight infection. Avoid Contact with Sick People Flu virus is spread when particles (微粒) blown into the air through a cough or sneeze reach someone else"s nose. So if you"re coughing or sneezing, cover your mouth and then wash your |  |
| 阅读理解。 | |
The Canadians love the great outdoor-20% of the Canadians go camping each year-and consider the | |
| 1. What makes the Canadians satisfied according to the passage? | |
| [ ] | |
| A. That most of their country remains wilderness. B. That there is little grassy land and few trees. C. That they can go hiking every year. D. That all of the rubbish can be dealt with. | |
| 2. How many tons of the household waste in Edmonton can not be processed in North America"s biggest composter a day? | |
| [ ] | |
| A. over 700 tons B. over 1000 tons C. over 1428 tons D. over 428 tons | |
| 3. All of the following statements are right Except _____. | |
| [ ] | |
| A. It is logical that the majority of Canadians want to look after their natural space B. In Halifax, throwing an apple core into a garbage can"is against the law C. Not all the Canadians have ever visited the-Rockies and want them to be well cared for D. The $100 million plant can recycle most of the household waste in Edmonton |