Миловидов В.А. Английский разговорный язык. Практическое пособие по развитию устной речи
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
continually growing due to the technological developments that have enhanced the growth in
living standards since XIXth century.
First, innovation has boosted up the productivity of natural resources. Second, innovation
makes it possible to recycle resources, thus reducing waste. Third, innovation affects the
prospective output contribution of natural resources (for example, the coal still underneath the
ground). If the discovery of new sources or technological innovation in a given year raises the
prospective output by an amount greater than the reduction in that year, then the stock of that
resource will be larger at the end of the year than at the beginning. The exhaustion of a
particular resource, though not impossible, is also not inevitable.
Since the times of the industrial revolution, consumption of power and raw materials has grown
rapidly. We used more energy between 1900 and 1920 than in all previous time, and each
twenty year period since has experienced a similar rate of increase in power demands. Still,
new sources of power have made it possible to make up for the used resourses of energy.
Experts assert that the effective stocks of a natural resource can be increased in at least three
ways:
1. New technologies are able to reduce the amount of a metal lost during mining or smelting,
which increases the effective stock of this metal. In the similar way, innovations allow for
extracting more resources out of previously abandoned sources. The less we waste, the more
of effective resource is available.
2. The effective stocks of natural resources within the economy may be increased by
substituting one resource for another. The illustration of this was the energy crises of the
seventies, when people used insulation extensively to save fuel (fiberglass substituted oil and
coal).
3. The third method to boost up our effective stocks natural resources is recycling.
:
abandon – , )
approach – ;
assert –
available – ,
coal –
effective – , ,
enhance – ,
exhaust –
exhaustible –
extensive –
extract – ,
fiberglass –
fuel –
inevitable –
insulation – , ;
mine – ;
particular – ,
recycle – ()
smelt – ()
substitute – ,
underneath – ,
waste – (); , ()
natural resources –
prospective output – () ,
raw material –
rate of increase –
make up for – ,
at least –
Exercise 11
Answer the questions:
1. What would happen to natural resources if we used them continuously?
2. Why are the effective stocks of resources growing despite the fact that we use them
continuously?
3. What are the effects of innovation on the stocks of natural resources?
4. What are the ways in which the effective stocks of natural resources can be increased?
5. How can we save fuel by insulating our homes?
Recycling
By means of recycling we can convert waste into reusable materials. It differs from reuse, which
simply means using a product again. In the developed countries up to about 20 percent of the
nation's solid waste is recycled.
Recycling allows both to reduce the amount of waste disposed in landfills and to have natural
resources. In the eighties environmentalists concentrated public attention on recycling as the
principal method of protecting the environment.
However, recycling is not always economically efficient. Neither does it always help to protect
the environment. On the other hand, assumptions that landfills and incinerators are necessarily
«bad,» and the nation is running out of landfill space, are not well grounded. Specialists say that
landfills can be safely sited and designed, and there is still plenty of space for them in every
country.
What we have to do is not to put landfills in places that come into contact with water, as well as
to design monitoring programs to prevent any possible harm that landfills may cause.
Of all the recycled materials aluminium and paper are the most popular. About 60 percent of all
aluminium beverage cans are recycled. It is accounted by the fact that recycling aluminium is
less expensive than producing new aluminium, as it takes 10 percent less energy to recycle
aluminium than to make it out from bauxite.
Paper and cardboard are also extensively recycled. Producing cardboard requires a wide
variety of used paper which is rather cheap to sort out. In addition there are lots of places (such
as grocery stores) where large quantities of corrugated boxes are used, which makes collection
quite efficient.
On the contrary, plastics are very expensive to collect and separate which limits the possibility
of their recycling. Nevertheless, around 20 percent of plastic soft drink bottles are now recycled
in the USA alone.
:
aluminium –
bauxite –
beverage –
can – (, )
cardboard –
corrugated – (), ()
dispose – ,
environmentalist –
incinerator – ,
landfill –
plastics – ,
reusable –
reuse –
solid –
by means of – (), ()
public attention –
economically efficient –
monitoring program –
wide variety –
sort out – ,
grocery store –
soft drink –
Exercise 12
Answer the questions:
1. What do we get when we recycle waste?
2. What is the difference between recycling and reuse?
3. What is a landfill?
4. Who concentrated public attention on recycling as the principal method of protecting the
environment in the eighties?
5. Why aren't landfills so dangerous as the general public believes?
6. What materials are most popular for recycling?
7. Why is it more economically efficient to recycle aluminium than to produce it from bauxite?
8. Why is paper so extensively recycled?
9. Why is it easy to find paper fit for recycling?
10. What portion of all plastic soft drink bottles is recycled in the USA?
Clinton Recycles
Bill and Hillary are now married 40 years. When they first got married, Bill said, «I am putting a
box under the bed. You must promise never to look in it.»
In all their 40 years of marriage, Hillary never looked. However, on the afternoon of their 40th
anniversary, curiosity got the best of her, and she lifted the lid and peeked inside. In the box
were 3 empty beer cans and $1,874.25 in cash. She closed the box and put it back under the
bed. Now that she knew what was in the box, she was doubly curious as to why.
That evening they were out for a special dinner. After dinner Hillary could no longer contain her
curiosity and she confessed and said «I am so sorry. For all these years I kept my promise and
never looked into the box under our bed. However, today the temptation was too much, and I
gave in. But now I need to know why do you keep the empty cans in the box?»
Bill thought for a while and said, «I guess after all these years you deserve to know the truth.
Whenever I was unfaithful to you I put an empty beer can in the box under the bed to remind
myself not to do it again.»
Hillary was shocked, but said, «I am very disappointed and saddened, but I guess after all those
years away from home on the road, temptation does happen and I guess that a few times is not
that bad considering the years.»
They hugged and made their peace. A little while later Hillary asked Bill, «Why do you have all
that money in the box?» Bill answered, «Whenever the box is filled with empty cans, I sell them
for recycling.»
:
anniversary –
confess – ,
consider – ,
contain –
curiosity –
deserve –
disappoint –
empty –
guess –
hug –
lid – ()
lift –
peek – ()
promise – ;
remind –
sadden – ,
temptation –
unfaithful –
curiosity got the best of her –
in cash –
doubly curious –
as to why –
contain curiosity –
on the road –
make peace – ,
Exercise 13
Answer the questions:
1. For how long have Bill and Hillary been married now?
2. What did Bill make Hillary promise when they got married?
3. Why did Hillary open the box on the afternoon of their 40th anniversary?
4. What did she see in the box?
5. Where did the Clintons go that evening?
6. Why did Bill think that Hillary deserved to know the truth?
7. Why did Bill put an empty beer can into the box after he had been unfaithful to Hillary?
8. Why wasn't Hillary too saddened at first?
9. What did she say or do after Bill told her abour the way beer cans were being recycled in the
Clintons family?
Pollution Controls
Although people in general and economists in particular agree that we must control pollution of
our environment, there is little agreement as to how this should be done.
The measures to control the pollution are divided into two groups. First, there exist different
regulatory standards based on the idea of the «best available» technology for all sorts of
pollution in every industry. But as each pollutant has many sources, national agencies that are
supposed to ban pollution have to establish numerous maximum discharge standards for any of
them.
Old sources of pollution (old factories, for example) can follow less strict standards than those
devised for new sources, as it is considered more expensive to modernize an old factory than to
introduce pollution control devices into a new one. Moreover, discharge standards for sources
that already exist, as well for new sources, are more onerous in places with a higher-quality
environment, that is with cleaner air, cleaner water, etc.
The regulations of pollution may be established by the federal government. Usually they are
very expensive. For example, direct expenditures for compliance with vehicle standards in the
USA totalled an estimated $14 billion in 1988, costs shouldered primarily by consumers.
The market-based approach to control pollution is less burdensome for taxpayers and the
government. This approach is based on market incentives to reduce pollution, which fall into two
groups: pollution fees and so-called «marketable permits.»
The first are taxes on polluters that are set proportionally to the amount they discharge into air,
water, or local landfill.
Marketable permits are discharge licenses. Polluters can buy and sell them to meet the control
levels established by the governments. Marketable permits, actually, allow manufacturers to
pollute the environment up to a certain level, and within the whole industry emitters may pollute
over the control level as long as other polluters compensate by polluting less. The government
decides on the desired level of pollution and the initial distribution of pollution rights within an
industry, the latter then being redistributed among all the enterprises concerned.
:
burdensome –
compliance –
devise – ,
discharge – ()
emitter – ( emit) , , ()
estimate – , ,
fee – ;
incentive – , ,
initial – ,
latter – ()
license – ,
maximum – ;
measure – ,
modernize –
numerous –
onerous – ,
permit –
pollutant – ,
polluter – ()
pollution – ()
primarily – ,
redistribute –
regulatory –
shoulder – ; ,
standard – ;
strict – ,
total – , ;
in general – , ,
in particular –
as to how – ,
best available –
follow standard –
pollution control device – ,
high-quality environment – «»
marketable permit – ,
discharge license –
meet the control level –
desired level –
all concerned –
Exercise 14
Answer the questions:
1. What do people in general and economists in particular agree upon?
2. How many groups are the measures to control the pollution divided into?
3. Why do national agencies supposed to ban pollution have to establish numerous maximum
discharge standards?
4. Why do old sources of pollution follow less strict discharge standards?
5. How does higher-quality environment affect the pollution discharge standards?
6. What institutions establish the regulations of pollution?
7. Why is the market-based approach to control pollution more preferable for taxpayers?
8. What are the market-based instruments to control pollution?
9. What are taxes on pollution?
10. How do «marketable permits» work?
God and the Environmentalists
In the Beginning, God created heaven and Earth…
He was then faced with a lawsuit for failing to file an environmental impact statement from
HEPA (Heavenly Environmental Protection Agency), an angelically staffed agency whose duty
was to keep the universe pollution free.
God was given a temporary permit for the heavenly portion of the project, but was issued a
cease and desist order on the earthly portion of the project, which needed further investigation
by HEPA. Upon completion of His construction permit and environmental impact statement, God
appeared before HEPA council to answer some questions. When asked why He began these
projects in the first place, He simply replied that He liked to be creative. This was not considered
an adequate reason and He was required to be more detailed.
HEPA was unable to see any practical use for earth anyway, since «the earth was void and
empty and darkness was on the face of the deep.» Then God said, «Let there be Light.»
He should never have brought up this point, since one member of the Council immediately
protested, asking how the Light was to be made. Would there be strip mining? Air Pollution?
God explained that the Light would come from a huge ball of fire.
Nobody on the council really understood this, but it was accepted, assuming 1) that there would
be no smog or smoke resulting from the burning; 2) a separate burning permit would be
required; and 3) since continuous light would be a waste of energy, it should be dark half of the
time. So God agreed to divide the Light and the Darkness and He would call the Light Day and
the Darkness Night. (The Council expressed no interest in in-house semantics.)
When asked how the earth would be covered, God said, «Let there be firmament made amidst
the waters; and let it divide the waters from the waters.» One ecologically radical Council
member accused Him of double talk, but the Council allowed God to do this, since He would
have to first file for a permit from the ABLM (Angelic Bureau of Land Management) and further
would be required to obtain water permits from the appropriate agencies involved.
The council asked if there would only be water and firmament, and God said, «Let the earth
bring forth the green herb, and such as may seed, and the fruit tree yielding after its own kind,
which may have seen itself upon the earth.» The Council agreed as long as native seed would
be used. About future development God also said, «Let the waters bring forth the creeping
creature having life, and the fowl that may fly over the earth.» Here again, the Council took no
formal action since this would require approval of the Fish and Game Commission coordinated
with the Heavenly Wildlife Federation.
It then appeared that everything was in order until God stated that He wanted to complete the
project in six days. At this time He was advised by the Council that his timing was completely
out of the question… HEPA would require a minimum of 180 days to review the application and
environmental impact statement, and then there would be public hearings. It would take 10 to
12 months before a permit would be given.
God said, «To Hell with it!»
:
amidst – ,
angel –
appropriate –
assume – ,
ball –
cease – ,
completion –
continuous – ,
creative – ,
desist – ,
divide – ,
environmentalist –
fail – , ,
file – ,
firmament – :
heaven –
heavenly –
herb – ,
huge –
impact –
involve – ),
lawsuit –
obtain – ,
order – ,
permit –
portion – ,
review – ;
seed – ,
semantics – ,
smog – ()
staff – ,
temporary –
timing –
universe –
void – ,
environmental impact statement –