Kicking the Big-car Haibt

Kicking the Big-Car Habit[1] The commercial exploitation of crude oil has been among the most liberating technologies the world has ever known. When pumped through an internal combustion engine stuck in a metal box, refined oil has given freedom of movement to billions. Before the automobile, the life experience of most of those who lived in the rich world were limited - as in much of the poor world they remain - to neighborhood and family. When shot through gas turbines on wings, oil has shrunk the planet in a way that was once the stuff of science fiction. Neither of my parents ever flew; both my children had flown 30,000 miles before they were 2 years old.[2] But on Sept. 11, 2001, the world was reminded that oil is also a dangerous drug. The cheapest, most easily accessible oil reserves are in the Middle East, the most volatile region on earth. Future supplies of oil will be costly not simply in terms of dollars and cents but also in their effect on the environment. As those in poor countries dream of the same freedom of movement that the wealthy have enjoyed for a century, oil's polluting effects will only get worse. The number of cars in Beijing, for example, is growing 15% a year, contributing to the yellow - gray haze that often envelops the city.[3] For all these reasons, it makes sense to dream of a world that is far, far less dependent on oil than it is now. Winning the Oil Endgame: American Innovation for Profits, Jobs and Security, written by a team led by Amory Lovins of the Rocky Mountain Institute in Snowmass, Colo., is one of the best analyses of energy policy yet produced. Lovins, who has been preaching the need for fuel efficiency for some 30 years, thinks big. His aim is to promote a set of policies that over the next two decades would save half the oil the U.S. uses, before moving to a hydrogen-based economy that dispenses with oil altogether (save for possible use as a fuel to produce hydrogen). If that seems hopelessly Utopian, Lovins reminds us that we have done something very like it before. Spurred by the oil price shocks of the 1970s, the United States between 1977 and 1985 increased efficiency and cut oil consumption 17% (and net oil imports 50%) while the economy grew 27%. The key to that revolution was a huge increase in average miles - per - gallon of the U.S. automobile fleet. If we had continued to increase energy efficiency at the same rate, the stability of Iraq and Saudi Arabia would by now be of minor concern to the U.S. policymakers. Instead, we bought SUVS and wasted two decades.[4] Those SUVS are no joke. In the United States, where 70% of oil is used for transportation, any energy policy is necessarily also and automobile policy. The single key insight of Lovins report is to focus on the need to reduce the weight of cars (without sacrificing safety) by using advanced materials like carbon fiber and composites instead of heavy steel. When powered by hybrid technologies that combine electricity with the internal - combustion engine, such light vehicles will produce enormous oil savings. Lovins proposes a nifty scheme, which would reduce the consumer price of such energy - efficient cars while increasing the price of gas guzzlers.[5] So far, Japanese firms, especially Toyota and Honda, have taken the lead in advanced automobile technology. The Japanese car industry, Lovins said to me last week, has "uninhibited visionary leaders in a country which has no oil and is acutely aware of its oil dependence". If the U.S. automobile industry waits for years to see if lightweight fuel - efficient cars are more than a niche business, Lovins argues, it will one day discover that it has lost another market to overseas firms. There is a need too for political leadership. Lovins insists the study's recommendations require "no major federal legislation". But at the very least, they need a Federal Government prepared to encourage states and localities to experiment with policies that increase energy efficiency.[6] All reports that promise an easy solution to a complex problem need to be taken with a degree of skepticism, and Winning the Oil Endgame is no exception. The usual pork - barrel politics could quickly bog down some of the policy prescriptions in the book, like loan guarantees for the development of new energy - saving technologies. But in a sensible presidential election, the recommendations of Winning the Oil Endgame would be discussed and debated from now through November. Don't hold your breath.I. Reading comprehension1. Which of the following is not mentioned as one of the reasons of less dependent on oil?A. Future supplies of oil will be more expensive.B. Oil reserves will be hardly accessible.C. Oil consumption will do harm to the environment.D. Regional stability will be affected on earth.2. The book Winning the Oil Endgame mainly talks about _______.A. future hydrogen-based economyB. the promotion of energy efficiency policiesC. the instability of Iraq and the Middle EastD. U.S. policymakers’ big concern of energy consumption3. It can be inferred from Pars. 3 & 4 that the instability of the Middle East is partly because, in this area, ______.A. people are so richB. people have different religions from those of the western peopleC. the oil preserves are richD. people enjoy greater freedom of movement4. Amory Lovins suggested reducing ______ to save energy consumption.A. the function of carsB. the size of carsC. the decoration of carsD. the weight of cars5. According to this text, Japanese firms have advanced automobile technology partly because Japan _______.A. has a long automobile historyB. has so many automobilesC. has no oil and entirely depends on oil importD. always takes the lead in advanced technologyII. Getting information1. What has hel ped the planet become “smaller” than before?2. Which area on earth reserves the biggest amount of oil?3. If people in poor countries enjoy the same freedom of movement as those in rich countries, what will happen?4. What is the cause of the yellow-gray haze frequently enveloping Beijing?5. What has Amory Lovins been doing over the past 30 years?6. What did the U.S. government do between 1977 and 1985, because of the oil price shocks in the 1970s?7. If the United States had continued to increase energy efficiency from 1977, what would be the U.S. government official’s consideration about Iraq and Saudi Arabia?8. What will happen to automobiles when they are powered by hybrid technologies?9. What should the U.S. political leadership do to increase energy efficiency?10. What does the writer expect the government to do during the presidential election?III. V ocabularyexploit stuff envelop endgame compositenifty guzzle uninhibited skepticism hold one’s breath1. The _____ is quite difficult to deal with.2. Her _____ laughter surprised everybody.3. The country _____ its natural resources in coal and timber.4. The audience _______ as the acrobat walked along the tightrope.5. The citizens had some ______ about the government’s policy.6. Fog _____ the airport that morning.7. Behavior is a _______ of individual and group influence.8. They’ve been ______ beer all evening.9. There is some old, smelly ______ in the back of the refrigerator.10. He has got a ______ little gadget for squeezing oranges.IV. Translation1. 我被这个问题卡住了，算不出结果。