广东高考英语历年真题及答案(2)
(C)
Car makers have long told this story to Americans: "We don't have the technology to build good electric cars. Customers don't want electrics becau they are so unattractive, slow and hard to charge. We would build them if only people wanted them." Chris Paine casts rious doubt on that story in his hard-hitting documentary film, Who Killed the Electric Car? The title suggests a murder mystery, and that's what Paine provides. Well, some of it is a mystery. We know the victim from the start - an electric car called the EV1. Also, we can e that Paine will largely blame the General Motors Corporation (GM).
GM built the EV1 becau the California Air Resources Board (CARB) ruled that cars in the state had to stop adding pollution to the air. The EV1, being electric, did not bum gasoline or put out any pollution. With technology available in 1990, GM had no trouble producing a car that could go 100 miles on a single charge and could recharge from an ordinary houhold electrical outlet. Remember the auto companies' claim that they don't have good 西红柿炒西葫芦
electric-car technology? If that were true, the EV1 would never have been born. The company made 1000 EV1s and lead them to customers in Southern California. (In a lea, a customer does not own a car but pays to u it for a certain time.)
Becau of its anti-pollution rule, CARB was sued (起诉) by oil companies, car companies, and the federal government. Under such pressure, CARB dropped its rule. No longer needing the EV1 to obey California's rules, GM responded by attacking its own child. The company ran advertiments saying how bad the EV1 was. Company reprentatives went on TV and radio shows to say it was unreliable. The company wanted to get the cars back and destroy them. The fact that EV1 were lead, not sold, is an important part of Paine's tale. GM still owned every car and could legally take them back. A few of them went to muums, but GM crushed most of them flat. If EV1s had been owned by their drivers, they would probably still be on the road. Many people who drove them loved them. In fact a group of EV1 drivers offered GM $1.8 million to buy a large number of cars and keep them going. GM refud. The company wanted the car to disappear.
Paine's criticism of the car industry, Washington's clo relationships with the oil industry, and California's state government are harsh. Each, he says, played a role in the murder of the EV1. Each has also defended itlf in the wake of the film, but Paine's excellent documentary will be hard for them to dismiss.
74. What's Paine's attitude towards car makers’ story?
A. Supportive. B. Indifferent. C. Doubtful. D. Neutral.
75. The E VI is invented to ______.
属羊和什么属相最配A. show the advanced technology of GM B. obey California's rules about air pollution
C. help tho who can't afford to buy a car D. get rid of the cars burning gasoline
76. Which of the following statements is TRUE about EV1s?
A. They are not popular becau their urs don't like them.
B. They are not reliable becau of technical problems.春季开学校长讲话稿
C. They need special equipment to get them charged.
消防员图片儿童画D. They are owned by GM rather than customers.
子宫肌瘤的原因77. What can be inferred from Paine's documentary?
A. CARB is to blame for the murder of the EV1.
B. The drive of profits leads to the disappearance of the EV1.
C. People can no longer e EV1s becau they have been destroyed.
D. Pressures from car-related companies forced CARB to stick to its rules.
活动结束语Section C
The sounds you make while chewing have a significant effect on the amount of food you eat, a new study has found. The results suggest that people are likely to consume less if they can hear themlves eating.
Rearchers at Brigham Young University and Colorado State University have found that your TV, radio and computer are making you fat. Not by bombarding (轰炸) you with food ads (though, they totally are) but by blocking the sounds of your chewing. In a recent study, they found that the noi your food makes while you're eating can have a significant effect on how much food you eat.
"Sound is typically labeled as the forgotten food n," adds Ryan Elder, assistant professor of marketing at BYU's Marriott School of Management. "But if people are more focud on the sound the food makes, it could reduce consumption.”
"For the most part, consumers and rearchers have overlooked food sound as an important nsory cue in the eating experience," said study coauthor Gina Mohr, an assistant professor of marketing at CSU.宝贝520
The team carried out three parate experiments to quantify the effects of food sound on quantity of food consumed during a meal. In one experiment, participants were given snacks to eat while they wore headphones playing either loud or quiet nois. The ones l
oud enough to mask the sound of chewing made subjects eat more - 4 pretzels compared to 2.75 pretzels for the "quiet" group.
