[C] Yet there are clearly some very real issues that need to be resolved. Like any new product entering the food chain, genetically modified foods must be subjected to rigorous testing. In wealthy countries, the debate about biotech is tempered by the fact that we have a rich array of foods to choose from--and a supply that far exceeds our needs. In developing countries desperate to feed fast-growing and underfed populations; the issue is simpler and much more urgent: Do the benefits of biotech outweigh the risks?

　　[D] The statistics on population growth and hunger are disturbing. Last year the world's population reached 6 billion. And by 2050, the UN estimates, it will be probably near 9 billion. Almost all that growth will occur in developing countries. At the same time, the world's available cultivable land per person is declining. Arable land has declined steadily since 1960 and will decrease by half over the next 50 years, according to the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications ( ISAAA).

　　How can biotech help?

　　[E] Biotechnologists have developed genetically modified rice that is fortified with beta-carotene(胡蘿卜素)--which the body converts into vitamin A--and additional iron, and they are working on other kinds of nutritionally improved crops. Biotech can also improve farming productivity in places where food shortages are caused by crop damage attribution to pests, drought, poor soil and crop viruses, bacteria or fungi ( 真菌 ).

　　[F] Damage caused by pests is incredible. The European corn borer, for example, destroys 40 million tons of the-world's corn crops annually, about 7% of the total. Incorporating pest-resistant genes into seeds can help restore the balance. In trials of pest-resistant cotton in Africa, yields have increased significantly. So far, fears that genetically modified, pest-resistant crops might kill good insects as well as bad appear unfounded.

　　[G] Viruses often cause massive failure in staple crops in developing countries. Two years ago, Africa lost more than half its cassava (樹薯) crop--a key source of calories-to the mosaic virus (花葉病毒).Genetically modified, virus-resistant crops can reduce that damage, as can drought-tolerant seeds in regions where water shortages limit the amount of land under cultivation. Biotech can also help solve the problem of soil that contains excess aluminum, which can damage roots and cause many staple-crop failures. A gene that helps neutralize aluminum toxicity (毒性) in rice has been identified. Many scientists believe biotech could raise overall crop productivity in developing countries as much as 25% and help prevent the loss of those crops after they are harvested.

　　[H]Yet for all that promise, biotech is far from being the whole answer. In developing countries, lost crops are only one cause ofhunger. Poverty plays the largest role. Today more than 1 billion people around the globe live on less than 1 dollar a day. Making genetically modified crops available will not reduce hunger if farmers cannot afford to grow them or if the local population cannot afford to buy the food those farmers produce.

　　[I] Biotech has its own "distribution" problems. Private-sector biotech companies in the rich countries carry out much of the leading-edge research on genetically modified crops. Their products are often too costly for poor farmers in the developing world, and many of those products won't even reach the regions where they are most needed. Biotech firms have a strong financial incentive to target rich markets first in order to help them rapidly recoup the high costs of product development. But some of these companies are responding to needs of poor countries.

　　[J] More and more biotech research is being carried out in developing countries. But to increase the impact of genetic research on the food production of those countries, there is a need for better collaboration between government agencies--both local and in developed countries--and private biotech firms. The ISAAA, for example, is successfully partnering with the U. S. Agency for International Development, local researches and private biotech companies to find and deliver biotech solutions for farmers in developing countries.

　　Will "Franken-foods" feed the world?

　　[K]Biotech is not a panacea ( 治百病的藥), but it does promise to transform agriculture in many developing countries. If that promise is not fulfilled, the real losers will be their people, who could suffer for years to come.

　　[L] The world seems increasingly to have been divided into those who favor genetically modified foods and those who fear them. Advocates assert that growing genetically altered crops can be kinder to the environment and that eating foods from those plants is perfectly safe. And, they say, genetic engineering--which can induce plants to grow in poor soils or to produce more nutritious foods—will soon become an essential tool for helping to feed the world's burgeoning( 迅速發展的) population. Skeptics contend that genetically modified crops could pose unique risks to the environment and to health--risks too troubling to accept placidly. Taking that view, many European countries are restricting the cultivation and importation of genetically modified agricultural products. Much of the debate are concerned about of safety. But what exactly does recent scientific research say about the hazards?

　　[M] Two years ago in Edinburgh, Scotland, eco-vandals stormed a field, crushing canola plants. Last year in Maine, midnight raiders hacked down more than 3,000 experimental poplar trees. And in San Diego, protesters smashed sorghum and sprayed paint over greenhouse walls. This far-flung outrage took aim at genetically modified crops. But the protests backfired: all the destroyed plants were conventionally bred. In each case, activists mistook ordinary plants for genetically modified varieties.

　　[N] It's easy to understand why. In a way, genetically modified crops--now on some 109 million acres of farmland worldwide--are invisible. You can't see, taste or touch a gene inserted into a plant or sense its effects on the environment. You can't tell, just by looking, whether pollen containing a foreign gene can poison butterflies or fertilize plants miles away. That invisibility is precisely what worries people. How, exactly, will genetically modified crops affect the environment--and when will we notice?

　　[O] Advocates of genetically modified or transgenic crops say the plants will benefit the environment by requiring fewer toxic pesticides than conventional crops. But critics fear the potential risks and wonder how big the benefits really are. "We have so many questions about these plants," remarks Guenther Stotzky, a soft microbiologist at New York University. "There's a lot we don't know and need to find out. "As genetically modified crops multiply in the landscape, unprecedented numbers of researchers have started fanning into the fields to get the missing information. Some of their recent findings are reassuring; others suggest a need for vigilance.

　　46. According to the UN's prediction, the population growth from now to 2050 is nearly all in developing countries.

　　47. Those people and countries restricting and opposed to planting and importing of genetically modified $ plants worry about their safety.

　　48. The boosters of genetically modified crops argue that these altered plants need fewer toxic pesticides.

　　49. The mosaic virus led to the loss of more than half of African main food two years ago.

　　50. Genetically modified crops can help to improve nutrient contents and farming productivity.

　　51. The most important factor that leads to hunger in developing countries is poverty, not crops lost.

　　52. The far-flung outrage destroys fields and plants because they misidentified ordinary plants for genetically modified varieties.

　　53. The debate on genetically modified foods is more heated in developing countries with fast-growing and half-starved populations.

　　54. One third of corn planted in America was genetically modified corn last year.

　　55. Majority of people believe genetically modified crop causes environmental problems.

　　語篇分析

　　46. According to the UN's prediction, the population growth from now to 2050 is nearly all in developing countries

　　譯文 根據聯合國的預測，從現在到2050年的人口增長幾乎都集中在發展中家。

　　定位 關鍵詞UN，2050，in developing countries定位到原文劃線句。

　　47. Those people and countries restricting and opposed to planting and importing of genetically modified plants worry about their safety.

　　譯文 對轉基因農作物產品的種植和進口持限制與反對態度的人們和國家所擔心的足其安全問題。

　　定位 由關鍵詞restricting，safety定位到原文劃線句。

　　48. The boosters of genetically modified crops argue that these altered plants need fewer toxic pesticides.

　　譯文 轉基因作物支持者辯稱轉基因作物需要更少的有毒殺蟲劑。

　　定位 由關鍵詞fewer toxic pesticides定位到原文劃線句。

　　49. The mosaic virus led to the loss of more than half of African main food two years ago.

　　譯文 兩年前，花葉病毒導致非洲的主要食物損失了一半以上。

　　定位 由關鍵詞The mosaic virus，half，African定位到原文劃線句。

　　50. Genetically modified crops can help to improve nutrient contents and farming productivity.

　　譯文 轉基因作物有助于改善作物的營養成分和農業生產力。

　　定位 由關鍵詞Genetically modified，nutrient，farming productivity定位到原文劃線句。

　　51. The most important factor that leads to hunger in developing countries is poverty, not crops lost.

　　譯文 在發展中國家，導致饑餓的最重要原因是貧窮，而非作物損失。

　　定位 由關鍵詞poverty，developing countries定位到原文劃線句。

　　52. The far-flung outrage destroys fields and plants because they misidentified ordinary plants for genetically modified varieties.

　　譯文 這些暴行破壞了田地與農作物，他們把一般作物誤認為是轉基因作物。

　　定位 由關鍵詞far-flung outrage，destroys定位到原文劃線句。

　　53. The debate on genetically modified foods is more heated in developing countries with fast-growing and half-starved populations.

　　譯文 在人口快速增長且吃不飽飯的發展中國家，對于轉基因作物的爭議更加激烈。

　　定位 由關鍵詞developing countries.population定位到原文劃線句。

　　54. One third of corn planted in America was genetically modified corn last year.

　　譯文 秘去年，美國轉基因玉米的種植面積占到了三分之一。

　　定位 由關鍵詞third，planted，America，last year定位到原文劃線句。

　　55. Majority of people believe genetically modified crop causes environmental problems.

　　譯文 大多數人認為轉基因作物會引起環境問題。

　　定位 由關鍵詞people，environmental定位到原：史劃線句。

　　10 Ways Obama Could Fight Climate Change

　　[A] One of the biggest surprises of President Barack Obama's inaugural address,on Monday was how much he focused on fighting climate change, spending more time on that issue than any other. "We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations," Obama said. The President pointed out that recent severe weather supplied an urgent impetus for energy innovation and staked the nation's economic future on responding to a changing climate. "We cannot cede to other nations the technology that will power new jobs and new industries--we must claim its promise," Obama said. '" That's how we will maintain our economic vitality and our national treasure--our forests and waterways; our croplands and snowcapped (山頂積雪的) peaks. That is how we will preserve our planet, commanded to our care by God. " so what could the President reasonably do to deliver on that vow? Here are ten of their suggestions:

　　Sunset coal with new incentives and regulations.

　　[B] "Provide incentives to phase out the oldest, most polluting power plants," said Robert Jackson, a climate scientist at Duke University. It's already happening, to some degree, as more of the nation transitions to natural gas. Earth scientist Bill Chameides, dean of Duke's Nicholas School of the Environment and a former chief scientist at the Environmental Defense Fund, urges the administration to use its Clean, Air Act authority to promulgate (頒布 )carbon regulations for existing power plants like it has for new ones: "Doing that will force fuel switching from coal to natural gas. "Invest federal stimulus money in nuclear power.

　　[C] It's hardly a perfect fuel, as accidents like Japan's Fukushima fallout have shown, but with safety precautions new nuclear plants can meaningfully offset dirtier types of energy, supporters say."Nuclear is the only short-to medium-term way to really get away from fossil fuels," said Peter Raven. President emeritus of the Missouri Botanical Garden. He said the damage done by relentless global warming will far exceed the damage done by faults in the nuclear system.

　　Kill the Keystone pipeline.

　　[D] The controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline is up for review again by the White House this year. "The font thing he should do to set the tone to a lower carbon economy is to reject the Keystone pipeline, “said Raymond Pierrehum Bert, a geophysical scientist at the University of Chicago. The pipeline was never going to be a major driver of global emissions, but Pierre humbert and some other environmentalists say that by killing it the President would send a clear message about America's intent to ramp down fossil fuels.

　　Protect the oceans by executive order.

　　[E] Land use is complicated, but large swaths of oceans can be protected by executive order. Just as President George W. Bush designated the world's largest marine monument northwest of Hawaii in 2006. Obama could single-handedly protect other areas. National Geographic Explorer-in-Residence Sylvia Earle said the President should focus on parts of the Arctic that are under U. S. control, putting them off limits to energy production, commercial fishing, and mineral exploration. Marine sanctuaries (禁捕區) won't stop climate change, but they can give marine species a better chance of adapting to it by reducing the other man-made threats the animals face.

　　Experiment with capturing carbon.

　　[F] Huge untapped reserves of natural gas and oil make it unlikely that the U. S. will transition away from fossil fuels in the immediate future. Instead, said Wallace Broecker, geology professor at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, we should attack the atmosphere's carbon surplus directly. "Obama could make available funds to build and test prototype air capture units" to capture and store CO2, said Broecker. Removing some carbon from the atmosphere could buy valuable time as policy makers and scientists explore more permanent solutions.

　　Grow government research for new energy sources.

　　[G] The Department of Energy has a nimble program that's tasked with innovative energy research—the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy. The ARPA-E funds research in biofuels, transmission,and battery storage, with an annual budget of $ 275 million. Last year, DOE officials requested at least $ 75 million more. Increasing funding for ARPA-E, said Rare Pomerance, former deputy assistant secretary of state for environment and development and currently an environmental consultant, "you get new technologies that undercut coal, oil, and gas. " Plus, he said, yon get a competitive advantage if American researchers uncover the next big idea in new energy.

　　Tax carbon.

　　[H] Congress would have to agree, but many climate experts say that the most meaningful way to tackle emissions is to set a price on carbon. "We should be asking people to pay the cost of putting carbon into the atmosphere as they buy the fuel," said Josh Willis, climate scientist and oceanographer at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. To gain political support for the idea, Obama would probably have to show that the tax wonld help accelerate technology, grow new industries, and pay down the deficit.

　　Dial back the federal government's energy use.

　　[I] With more than I. 8 million employees, $ 500 billion in annual purchasing power, and 500,000 buildings to operate, the federal government has been a leader in reducing energy use since Obama signed a 2009 executive order to cut waste. "I would urge him to keep using the power of government to promote energy conservation," said Syndonia Bret-Harte, an Arctic biologist who studies climate change at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks.

　　Build a scientific clearinghouse for climate information.

　　[J] "I advocate for building a better information system on what is happening and why," said Kevin Tren berth, head of the Climate Analysis Section at the U. S. National Center for Atmospheric Research. That involves compiling observations related to climate change from around the world and using the data to refine climate modeling. Think of it as a one-stop, user-friendly website that clearly demonstrates how weather data from around the globe are influenced by broader shifts in the planet's climate.

　　Keep talking. Despite a consensus among top scientists, the world still needs some convincing on climate change.

　　[K] A CNN poll last week found that just 49 percent of Americans agree that global warming is real and is due to human activities. "The most important thing the President can do is to build on his inaugural comments to heighten the sense of urgency about rapid climate destabilization and clarify its connection to virtually every other issue on the national agenda," said David Orr, environmental studies professor at Oberlin College. That means using the bully clergymen to show how a more volatile climate affects everything from agriculture to transportation to 21st-century warfare.

　　46. The urge to promulgate carbon regulations is aimed at pushing power plants to replace coal by natural gas.

　　47. Marine sanctuaries should be preserved because they help sea species adapt to climate alteration.

　　48. The government should take the responsibility to raise Americans' awareness about climate change.

　　49. Many climate experts believe that the most effective way to lower emission is to tax on carbon.

　　50. Nuclear supporters argue that nuclear system failures are less challenging than global warming.

　　51. Recent extreme weather made President Obama feel it is urgent to address climate change.

　　52. Keystone pipeline should be rejected because it is a signal to reduce fossil fuels.

　　53. Since Obama signed a 2009 executive order to cut waste, the federal government has taken the lead in saving energy.

　　54. Lower carbon emission will be most likely to happen if research in new energy resources succeeds.

　　55. Compared with turning to new energy, America prefers carbon capture and store as a temporary measure.

　　語篇分析

　　46. The urge to promulgate carbon regulations is aimed at pushing power plants to replace coal by natural gas.

　　譯文 推動頒布碳法規的目的在于迫使燃料從煤炭轉向天然氣。

　　定位 由關鍵詞promulgate carbon regulations，coal，natural gas定位到原文劃線句。

　　47. Marine sanctuaries should be preserved because they help sea species adapt to climate alteration.

　　譯文 秘海洋禁捕區應予以保留，因為它們可以讓海洋生物更好地適應氣候變化。

　　定位 關鍵詞 Marine sanctuaries，sea species定位到原文劃線句。

　　48. The government should take the responsibility to raise Americans' awareness about climate change.

　　譯文 秘政府應該承擔起責任，加強美國民眾對氣候變化的認識。

　　定位 由關鍵詞Americans’awareness定位到原文劃線句。

　　49. Many climate experts believe that the most effective way to lower emission is to tax on carbon.

　　譯文 氣候專家認為解決碳排放問題最有效的方法就是征稅。

　　定位 關鍵詞Many climate experts定位到原文劃線句。

　　50. Nuclear supporters argue that nuclear system failures are less challenging than global warming.

　　譯文 核能支持者認為核能事故的危害比起全球變暖的危害要小。

　　定位 由關鍵詞Nuclear supporters，less challenging，global warming定位到原文劃線句。

　　51. Recent extreme weather made President Obama feel it is urgent to address climate change.

　　譯文 近期的極端天氣讓奧巴馬總統感到應對氣候變化的任務越來越緊迫。

　　定位 由關鍵詞extreme weather，Obama，climate change定位到原文劃線句。

　　52. Keystone pipeline should be rejected because it is a signal to reduce fossil fuels.

　　譯文 重點輸油管道項目應該被否決，因為這是減少化石燃料的信號。

　　定位 由關鍵詞Keystone pipeline定位到原文劃線句。

　　53. Since Obama signed a 2009 executive order to cut waste, the federal government has taken the lead in saving energy.

　　譯文 自從奧巴馬總統在2009年下令減少廢氣排放之后，聯邦政府一直是節能方面的領導者。

　　定位 關鍵詞0bama，2009 executive order，cut waste，lead定位到原文劃線句。

　　54. Lower carbon emission will be most likely to happen if research in new energy resources succeeds.

　　譯文 如果新能源研究成功，碳排放很有可能會獺少。

　　定位 由關鍵詞new energy定位到原文劃線句。

　　55. Compared with turning to new energy, America prefers carbon capture and store as a temporary measure.

　　譯文 與新能源相比起來，美國更傾向于將碳獲取與存儲作為臨時措施。

　　定位 由關鍵詞carbon capture and store定位到原文劃線句。