❶ 一篇关于环保的英语文章，最新的
Nowadays, the environmental protection is becoming one of the most important issues in the world. Being one of the members of our society, what shall we do to protect the environment?
First, stop using plastic bags, boxes and bottles. Stores should be required to use the bags, boxes and bottles which are made from paper.
Secondly, more and more trees and flowers should be planted to keep our surrounding clean. People must be required to plant plants around their houses and work places.
Finally, we must control the pollution by law, according to which, polluted water and air exhausted from factories should be forbidden.
These are some of the measures that we can take to protect our environment and they are not hard tasks for us. Remember, the earth is the only planet we could live at present.
Since the first day, BNBM has paid more attention to protect the environment as its social responsibility, by developing green building materials, procing green procts and creating green enterprise. According to the spirit of "From the nature, for the nature and return to the mature", BNBM has tried its best in developing new technology and improving equipment to rece the pollution.
❷ 高考英语阅读理解，今年不能考哪些类型题，社会文化类，人物传记类，说理议论类，科普知识类，应用广告类
科普，说理议论，应用广告
❸ 求助，我极需高考英语阅读社会生活类环保类文章的特点及应以策略，帮帮我啊
题型分析及应对策略
1．主旨类
(1) What is the main idea (subject) of this passage ?
(2) What does this passage mainly (primarily)concerned ?
(3) The main theme of this passage is ___________.
(4) The main point of the passage is__________.
(5) Which of the following is the best title for the passage ?
(6) The title that best expresses the theme of the passage is ___________.
(7) On which of the following subject would the passage most likely be found in a textbook ?
(8) The purpose of the writer in writing this passage _________.
(9) Which of the following best describes the passage as a whole ?
应对策略：
跳读（skimming）文章的开头、结尾及段落的首句和尾句。主旨应该是宏观的，但有不能失之空泛。
2．态度类
(1) What’s the writer’s attitude to …?
(2) What’s the tone of the passage?
(3) The author’s view is _______
(4) The writer’s attitude of .this passage is apparently _________.
(5) The author suggests that _________
(6) According to author __________
应对策略：
有的文章观点明确，基调清楚，这时跳读（skimming）文章的开头、结尾及段落的首句和尾句。而另一些则需要阅读时对某些细节仔细琢磨。尤其应注意有些表明作者观点词汇，如形容词、副词等。
3．细节类
(1) Which of the following is NOT true according to the information in the passage?
(2) Which of the following is mentioned in the passage?
(3) What is the example of . . . as described in the passage?
(4) The author mentions all of the following except . . .
(5) The reason for . . .is . . .
(6) The author states that . . .
(7) According to the passage, when (where, why, how, who, etc. ) ...
应对策略：
寻读（scanning）出现关键词的相应段落，四个答案中相同的词即为关键词。仔细对比答案与文中相应细节。
4．推理类
(1)The writer implies but not directly states that__________.
(2) It can be inferred from the passage that_________.
(3) The author strongly suggests that__________ .
(4) It can be concluded from the passage that________.
(5) The passage is intended to__________ .
(6) The writer indicates that__________ .
应对策略：
推理类题，可能是针对文章整体也可能是针对某个细节。
如果是前者，跳读（skimming）文章的开头、结尾及段落的首句和尾句。即可得出答案。
如果是后者，寻读（scanning）相应段落并仔细研读相应细节。
4．词汇类
(1) According to the author ,the word "…"means_______.
(2) Which of the following is nearest in meaning to "…"?
(3) The term ".."in paragraph… can be best replaced by ….
(4) What’s the meaning of "…"in line …of paragraph….?
(5) As used in the line …, the word "…"refers to _______.
应对策略：
寻读（scanning）定位相关词的出处。根据上下文与词的构造来猜测。最好将四个选项带回文中，看看哪一个最合适。即使不是生词，也应当作生词来猜。
5．指代类
(1) What does “it” refers to in Line 2, Paragraph 5?
(2 )What does “they” satnd for in Line 3, Paragraph 2?
(3) What does “their” satnd for in Line 3, Paragraph 2?
(4) What does “its” refer to in Line 3, Paragraph 2?
应对策略：
寻读（scanning），定位相关代词的出处，离它最近且单复数一致的名词即是。注意英语中“they”既可指代人也可指代物。
❹ 关于环保的英语文章
Environment(环境)
The environment is everything around us,for example,air,water,animals,plants,buildings and so on.They all affect us in many ways and are closely related to our lives.People can't live without the environment.Everybody needs to breathe air,drink water and eat food every day.We burn coal to keep warm,and we use wood to make paper.As a result,we become part of the environment.环境围绕在我们身边,例如:空气,水,动物,建筑等等.它们从各个方面影响着我们的生活,与我们的生活密切相关,人们离开环境就无法生存.每人每天都要呼吸,喝水和吃东西.我们烧煤取暖,用木材造纸.结果,我们也成为环境的一部分.
The environment has been getting worse and worse for many years.We have been upgrading our living standard,meanwhile the envirinment has been polluted.Smoke from factory chimneys pollutes the air.Machines and engines make noises that annoy us constantly.Animals are homeless because the forests are decreasing every minute.Streets are crowded with people and vehicles.The environment is the most important things,but it is becoming painful for us to live in it now.So it's time to solve those problems.很多年以来,环境日益恶化.我们在提高生活水平的同时,也在导致环境污染.从工厂烟囱里冒出的烟污染空气;机器和引擎经常发出恼人的噪音.因为森林每分钟都在减少,使动物们无家可归.街道上挤满了人和车辆.环境在我们生活中是最重要的.但是现在它已经让人们讨厌.所以该是解决这些问题的时候了.
Fortuantely,it isn't too late to correct our mistakes.People are coming to realize the importance of the environment.We have begun to try our best to improve it.Laws are being made dealing with air,water and noise pollution.The river will be bright,the sky will be clear,the flowers will be beautiful,and the sunbeam will be dazzling and pretty.We believe that we will be able to save our environment and live in a better world.幸运的是现在纠正错误还不晚.人们正意识到环境的重要性.我们已经开始尽全力改善环境.法律也开始涉及到空气,水和噪音等污染问题.将来,河流会更清澈,天空会更晴朗,花朵会更鲜艳,阳光会更灿烂,更温暖.保护环境会使我们生活在一个更加美好的世界中.
❺ 环保类英语作文，怎么考
With the improvement of our living standard, more and more people can afford a car. As a result, our roads are more often than not crammed with cars. However, with more and more waste gas being discharged by the cars, the problem of air pollution becomes even more serious. So nowadays we advocate to lead a low-carbon life.
My suggestion is we should ride bikes more often instead of driving cars.By riding a bike, we can not only exercise our body but also protect our environment.
❻ 环保类文章（英文）
What Environmental Disaster?
We have developed a huge and thriving society; and in the process we deforest huge sections of land for living and livestock grazing. This decreases oxygen and increases carbon dioxide in the atmosphere; possibly adding to global warming though the greenhouse effect. This mass population proces mass amounts of waste, so to deal with that we just throw it into the ground, which in turn contaminates our water supply and contributes to further deforestation. We develop motorized transportation; and then burn non-renewable fossil fuels that put lead, carbon monoxide, sulfur and nitrogen oxides, ozone, excess carbon dioxide, and other harmful particulates into the atmosphere (Skjel & Whorton 95-108). This proces dangers like smog and cancer and contributes to global warming. In the proction of fuel we exhaust oil reserves and pollute the oceans through spills from tankers. This endangers wilderness and wildlife. We proce an inert, easily procible propellant for aerosols; and then realize it's only inert on the ground. Once it's bombarded by UV ray in the upper atmosphere it releases a highly destructive ion that wreaks havoc on the protective ozone layer shielding us from those same deadly UV rays, creating a hole in the layer allowing the radiation through, increasing cancer and other genetic defects. We build rockets capable of going into space and breaking the earth's gravitational pull; and then immediately start to pollute this new environment with spent rockets and boosters along with other miscellaneous particles of debris (Curran and Haw 3).
Michael Crichton writes, "What we call nature is a complex system of far greater subtlety than we are willing to accept. We make a simplified view of nature and then botch it all up. ...You have to understand what you don't understand. How many times must the point be made? How many times must we see the evidence? We build the Aswan Dam and claim it is going to revitalize the country. Instead, it destroys the fertile Nile Delta, proces parasitic infestation, and wrecks the Egyptian economy" (Jurassic Park 91).
To the common person our current situation contains little hope. All the advancement and improvements have done little to further our species. With each one has come a new environmental issue. You almost need to evaluate each situation in terms of positives and negatives. However, at the root of all this chaos you'll find anthropocentrism, a human centered way of thinking. This way of thinking as an attitude, and moral theory, centers on humans as the highest of the significant beings. The theory views nature and the environment in terms of their use value for humans only (Michaels 7). So all of the above developments with costs can be justified through their usefulness for humans.
The human centered ethic is deeply rooted in the past through the ancient Greek and Roman societies.
To pursue further development based on this ethic would be disastrous. With our current numbers of population and rate of growth we're just asking for an environmental catastrophe of the highest magnitude to act as a wake up call. Granted that a great deal of the population realizes that unless action is taken today then we'll have to face that disaster tomorrow. The principle question is how to go about alleviating and repairing the damage we've already caused. We also need to address how to prevent doing further damage for the sake of future generations.
The only problem with this view is that it is still a human centered ethic. It still sees the environment as a thing to be utilized by humans for their own pleasure. It doesn't do enough. The problems aren't getting fixed. Better ways of doing things are being researched, but the underlying problem is not receiving any attention. So the environmental downward spiral is only slowed down and is not fixed. We've still got the same problems.
To take the conservationist attitude further you would see all sentient beings as holding moral standing and e consideration. This includes most of the animals in the world; any animal capable of experiencing pleasure and pain. Through these experiences you form the basis for the extended moral theory. If the animals perish through their habitat's destruction or outside influences, then their future pleasures will no longer be. When you take into account whole societies and communities of animals then the added value to the environment increases exponentially as you combine their happiness with the happiness never experienced by their future generations (Singer 275-276). So by taking this viewpoint you place even more intrinsic value on the environment through the experiences of all sentient animals involved.
But at a time when our behavior may well lead us to extinction, I see no reason to assume that we have any awareness at all. We are stubborn, self-destructive conformists. Any other view of our species is just a self-congratulatory delusion" (The Lost World 7-8). Granted this does not present a case for sentience on the basis of pain vs. pleasure, but it does present an interesting way to think about classifying sentience. So you can see drawing the cut off line for even lower animals could present considerable challenges. You have trouble reaching an adequate definition of "sentient." You are now facing how much awareness a creature has to perceive pain and pleasure along with joy from anticipation of future events to consider it morally significant. If a cat is significant, but not a fish, what makes the cat a moral patient while the fish is not? Where is there a difference? There is a problem of arbitrarily assigning moral value when actual feelings and emotions are beyond description.
To go a step further away from human sentience you would hold all living thing to be of moral value. This would then bring plants and non-sentient animals into the picture. This view holds life as the ultimate intrinsic value. Beings have moral value in just being alive. So life is viewed as an intrinsic good, and no verifying pleasures or pains being experienced are needed to allot this worth. Anything living is held with a reverence for that life (Singer 277-278).
2】
The Environmental Revolution - We Can Make a Difference!
Since the first time having blown bubbles in my Open Water class, I've logged over 100 dives. This love for diving has evolved into an intense passion towards protecting the ocean, and all of its inhabitants. I've chosen to put my love for the ocean into action, as an environmentalist. Actually, this passion extends out towards efforts that look to help all the planetary domains gain protection. As such, I appreciate when others take the time ecate me on those other realms for which I know less about. To be an environmentalist, one must choose the cause which resonates within ones sole, and run with it. One must be willing to ecate people about the environment while being open to ecation from those people who support other causes. Together we can help each other towards learning how to become a true "Environmentalist".
We must all encourage positive collaboration and ecation as opposed to being against something. For example, sharks are being decimated to near extinction simply for their fins. The fins are used to make Shark Fin soup, a delicacy popular particularly in Taiwan and Singapore. It would be easy to blame these communities for creating the demand. However, in conversing with Asian environmentalists, they liken the culture around eating Shark Fin soup to the culture surrounding Americans eating turkey for Thanksgiving dinner. There are ongoing efforts to ecate these people, by members of their own community, on just how dangerous this cultural practice is and the devastating impact this could have on their (our) world if all the sharks were to disappear as a result.
Environmentalists everywhere are making a difference! Famous restaurants have taken endangered Swordfish off their menus, these same restaurants are buying wild-caught salmon (and boosting the economy of local fisheries in the process), laundromats have started selling green detergent, this just to name a few of these enlightened changes. This is how the "Environmentalist" can begin the revolution. Just find something you believe in and make a stand. One by one, we can make our planet a cleaner place to live, steeped in healthy bio-diversity for generations to come.
3
Giving 1% to Protect Our Environment
Though most of the world's surface is covered by water, since the Earth is so large relative to human horizons, there doesn't appear to be a shortage of land. However, when one begins to think of land in terms of a human resource, i.e., a procer of food, a provider of wood, an expanse for passage, one realizes that many portions are either too lacking in nutrients, too high in elevation, too prone to flooding, or too cold or ice-ridden for extensive use. Furthermore, habitable lands are becoming less abundant e to desertification (the expansion of deserts e to the misuse of land), agricultural expansions and rising sea levels. Since humans aren't the only species that need land, it isn't surprising that this resource is becoming limited for other forms of life too. In part as a result of this added stress on living things, we are also witnessing extinctions of grand proportions-at a rate of many thousands species per year. Since these losses are largely e to human actions, such as deforestation and non-native species introction, many are beginning to pay attention to how we use and protect land. Recent ecological research has also recently provided a message of hope concerning the future well-being of life on this planet.
In the world today, scientists estimate that the Earth is losing at least 1 percent of species every ten years, and the percentage loss may be close to 5 percent. Even if only the lower rate persists, the Earth will have lost near half of its biological diversity by 2070. Can this be possible? Many esteemed scientists think so. While the future appears bleak, several recent insights tell us that we have the potential to significantly rece what amounts to a biotic holocaust, one not witnessed on Earth for over 60,000,000 years. While there are hopeful signs in the area of human activities (such as increased acreage of nature preserves and national parks), the hope of which I speak of here stems from specific characteristics of the other forms of life which may enable us to mutually coexist in the long term.
The Earth's organisms are wonderfully varied in size, shape, function, behavior, and genetic code. One only need to consider that there are ~ 15,000 species of butterflies and ~50,000 species of mushrooms worldwide to begin to fathom the immensity of variety that this planet has. Yet, as different as the species come, the bulk of living things are also similar in a couple of very important ways. Most living things live in relatively small regions and do not travel far from where they or their parents were born. In fact, recent biological and ecological work has determined that most land species are very particular about where they live. As opposed to humans whose choice of home is largely driven by economic and political forces (mobility driven by availability of wealth or forced relocation), flora and fauna find themselves in locations for which they are adapted. We now know that many species of insects and plants have a very restricted range in which they found. Very few organisms are ubiquitous like we are. It goes without saying that you aren't going to find a Great Blue Heron or a Grizzly visiting Antarctica or climbing Mt. Everest; yet you might find the snow bear (recently discovered and previously known as the Abominable Snowman) doing the latter. Recognizing that most living things are rather localized ring their lifetimes has profound implications, both hopeful and cautious. On the one hand, it suggests that we can learn a lot about species by parking our scientific minds in specific locations. On the other hand, it means that if we destroy even small areas of the globe we are likely causing great and even irreversible destruction to the species that are found there.
We have also determined that there are specific locations on our planet where a disproportionate number of species live. For our species, Asia serves as the homeland for most. In fact more than 60 percent of humans lives on this largest of continents (which only makes up 24 percent of the land surface on the planet). With other life forms, geographic concentrations sometimes defy description. We only recently became aware that the vast majority of terrestrial (as distinguished from oceanic or riparian) species collectively live on just 1 percent of the Earth's land surface. (If humans lived at a comparable concentration level, we'd all have to cluster together in an area roughly the size of Antarctica or twice that of Australia.) This mind-blowing realization has prompted those that have been struggling to protect organisms a new way of thinking about such protection. They have concluded that if we humans could somehow find a way to avoid disturbing just 1-2 percent of the land surface, nearly 70 percent of the world's terrestrial species might be able to survive. Recently some conservationists have refocused their attention on these unique locations.
The regions of the globe that contain such a splendid array of biological diversity have been named "hot spots," a name that communicates their critical status. In what has to be the most beautiful books I have seen, Hotspots represents the collective work of scientists Russ and Cristina Mittermeier and Norman Myers as well as photographer Patricio Robles Gil. In this oversized volume, these four scholars have assembled more than three hundred vivid photographs of some of the world's endangered species and threatened ecosystems. These absolutely breath-taking images come from the what they refer to as "the 25 most critically important regions" in the world. These regions originally constituted almost 12 percent of the world's land surface but now, e to human pressure at many levels, only a little more than 1 percent remains intact. What makes these locations, which are found on all continents except Antarctica, so "hot" is that they are home to hordes of the Earth's plants and animals and they face imminent danger from a variety of human activities. The Hotshot authors and others strongly believe that the global community can do wonders if these areas move to the top of our priority list.
But what will have to happen for these spots to be protected? There are no simple answers to this central question. Unfortunately, those of us in the United States who have the luxury of time to even ponder such questions, face many obvious difficulties. First, nearly all of the hotspots are located outside of our territorial boundaries, exceptions being the forests of Oregon and California as well as portions of Southern Florida (namely the Keys and the Everglades). Key hotspots are found in New Zealand, Madagascar, and Indonesia as well as the continental parts of south-east Asia. Obviously we cannot expect that we will be able to force other countries to enact and enforce laws that will greatly rece biological degradation. Yet, while many other countries have ratified the Biodiversity Treaty that was drafted at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, it has never reached the floors of the U.S. Congress for a vote; Canada, Japan, and the European Union are among those to ratify it. By this inaction our nation apparently lacks the wherewithal to support global conservation efforts as a matter of principle. However, given that the wealthy nations in concert with international banks promote unsustainable extraction of resources in the world's developing countries, it would appear that we have an obligation to do so.
If our national policy makers are unwilling to commit themselves to the protection of global ecosystems and species, we still have ourselves to look to for sources of positive change. All of us have tremendous purchasing power, especially in comparison to the majority of the other human residents on this planet; Barry Bearak, a Pulitzer Prize-winner journalist who recently spoke at Knox College's convocation, referred to the residents of the United States as "filthy rich," a conclusion he came to after spending a great deal of time in the poorer regions of the world, particularly Afghanistan and India. What we buy makes a difference. The environmental campaign to support shade coffee rather than sun coffee is just one of many attempts for the consumer to support sustainable practices in regions of great ecological diversity. According to the Northwest Shad Coffee Campaign, shade coffee agricultural allows for the extraction of a desired resource but at the same time allows between 3-8 times as many birds species to persist not to mention many more mid-size mammals as well as amphibians and beetles. Coffee is also a particularly important commodity in terms of the health of ecological systems because the countries that proce the bulk of it are precisely the same countries that are home to the majority of the world's species; the countries of Brazil, Bolivia, Indonesia, Vietnam collectively proce ~40 percent of the 17 billion pounds of coffee that are harvested each year (folks, that's more than 3 pounds per person!). Burdensome debts also force many developing countries to endlessly delay infrastructure investment. Debt-for-nature swaps, an idea proposed by Dr. Thomas Lovejoy of the World Wildlife Federation in the mid-1980s, have enabled poor countries to relieve foreign debt and international nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to increase commitment to conservation programs both at the same time. In these swaps, NGOs pay off a poor country's debt to a bank or well-to-do country at greatly reced costs in order to establish agreements for investment in national parks, for example. While not a cure-all, these efforts have begun the paradigm shift from unabated expansion and unhealthy extraction to one supportive of saving natural ecosystems and securing the health and welfare of all human populations.
Threats to these locations represent massive scale intrusions taken by societies found on every continent. Unfortunately, there is so much that will be lost if these "special" places aren't quickly protected from future degradation. On the bright side though, so much of the world's genetic diversity lives in just a couple handfuls of "hotspots" that if these locations were saved hordes of species would be able to persist into the next millennium. The time is now to respond to this fairly recent observation and insight. It is time for the world to begin to act like a civilized 21st Century society. It is incumbent upon us, those with time and wealth, to maintain the momentum that others have started. The masses of life forms are relying on us to make the best attempt at this daunting yet critical task. Hopefully our species will be sensible enough to leave at least 1 percent of land alone, so that other life forms may continue to exist. Do we need all 100 percent?
都是老外写的