Is there enough oil beneath the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (保护区) (ANWR) to help secure America’s energy future? President Bush certainly thinks so. He has argued that tapping ANWR’s oil would help ease California’s electricity crisis and provide a major boost to the country’s energy independence. But no one knows for sure how much crude oil lies buried beneath the frozen earth with the last government survey, conducted in 1998, projecting output anywhere from 3 billion to 16 billion barrels.
    The oil industry goes with the high end of the range, which could equal as much as 10% of U.S. consumption for as long as six years. By pumping more than 1 million barrels a day from the reserve for the next two three decades, lobbyists claim, the nation could cut back on imports equivalent to all shipments to the U.S. from Saudi Arabia. Sounds good. An oil boom would also mean a multibillion-dollar windfall (意外之财) in tax revenues, royalties (开采权使用费) and leasing fees for Alaska and the Federal Government. Best of all, advocates of drilling say, damage to the environment would be insignificant. “We’ve never had a document case of oil rig chasing deer out onto the pack ice.” says Alaska State Representative Scott Ogan.
    Not so far, say environmentalists. Sticking to the low end of government estimates, the National Resources Defense Council says there may be no more than 3.2 billion barrels of economically recoverable oil in the coastal plain of ANWR, a drop in the bucket that would do virtually nothing to ease America’s energy problems. And consumers would wait up to a decade to gain any benefits, because drilling could begin only after much bargaining over leases, environmental permits and regulatory review. As for ANWR’s impact on the California power crisis, environmentalists point out that oil is responsible for only 1% of the Golden State’s electricity output—and just 3% of the nation’s.

    “Tear ‘em apart!” “Kill the fool!” “Murder the referee (裁判)!”
    These are common remarks one may hear at various sporting events. At the time they are made, they may seem innocent enough. But let’s not kid ourselves. They have been known to influence behavior in such a way as to lead to real bloodshed. Volumes have been written about the way words affect us. It has been shown that words having certain connotations (含义) may cause us to react in ways quite foreign to what we consider to be our usual humanistic behavior. I see the term “opponent” as one of those words. Perhaps the time has come to delete it from sports terms.
    The dictionary meaning of the term “opponent”is “adversary ”: “enemy ”; “one who opposes your interests.” “Thus, when a player meets an opponent, he or she may tend to treat that opponent as an enemy. At such times, winning may dominate one’s intellect, and every action, no matter how gross, may be considered justifiable. I recall an incident in a handball game when a referee refused a player’s request for a time out for a glove change because he did not considered then wet enough. The player proceeded to rub his gloves across his wet T-shirt and then exclaimed. “Are they wet enough now?”
    In the heat of battle, players have been observed to throw themselves across the court without considering the consequences that such a move might have on anyone in their way. I have also witnessed a player reacting to his opponent’s international and illegal blocking by deliberately hitting him with the ball as hard as he could during the course of play. Off the court, they are good friends. Does that make any sense? It certainly gives proof of a court attitude which departs from normal behavior.
    Therefore, I believe it is time we elevated (提升) the game to the level where it belongs thereby setting an example to the rest of the sporting world. Replacing the term “opponent” with “associate” could be an ideal way to start.
    The dictionary meaning of the term “associate” is “colleague”; “friend”; “companion.” Reflect a moment! You may soon see and possibly feel the difference in your reaction to the term “associate” rather than “opponent.”

    Consumers are being confused and misled by the hodge-podge (大杂烩) of environmental claims made by household products, according to a “green labeling” study published by Consumers International Friday.
    Among the report’s more outrageous (令人无法容忍的) findings-a German fertilizer described itself as “earthworm friendly” a brand of flour said it was “non-polluting” and a British toilet paper claimed to be “environmentally friendlier”
    The study was written and researched by Britain’s National Consumer Council (NCC) for lobby group Consumer International. It was funded by the German and Dutch governments and the European Commission.
    “While many good and useful claims are being made, it is clear there is a long way to go in ensuring shoppers are adequately informed about the environmental impact of products they buy,” said Consumers International director Anna Fielder.
    The 10-country study surveyed product packaging in Britain, Western Europe, Scandinavia and the United States. It found that products sold in Germany and the United Kingdom made the most environmental claims on average.
    The report focused on claims made by specific products, such as detergent (洗涤剂) insect sprays and by some garden products. It did not test the claims, but compared them to labeling guidelines set by the International Standards Organization (ISO) in September, 1999.
    Researchers documented claims of environmental friendliness made by about 2,000 products and found many too vague or too misleading to meet ISO standards.
    “Many products had specially-designed labels to make them seem environmentally friendly, but in fact many of these symbols mean nothing,” said report researcher Philip Page.
    “Laundry detergents made the most number of claims with 158. Household cleaners were second with 145 separate claims, while paints were third on our list with 73. The high numbers show how very confusing it must be for consumers to sort the true from the misleading.” he said.
    The ISO labeling standards ban vague or misleading claims on product packaging, because terms such as “environmentally friendly” and “non-polluting” cannot be verified. “What we are now pushing for is to have multinational corporations meet the standards set by the ISO.” said Page.

    Two hours from the tall buildings of Manhattan and Philadelphia live some of the world’s largest black bears. They are in northern Pennsylvania’s Pocono Mountains, a home they share with an abundance of other wildlife.
    The streams, lakes, meadows (草地), mountain ridges and forests that make the Poconos an ideal place for black bears have also attracted more people to the region. Open spaces are threatened by plans for housing estates and important habitats (栖息地) are endangered by highway construction. To protect the Poconos natural beauty from irresponsible development, the Nature Conservancy (大自然保护协会) named the area one of America’s “Last Great Places”.
    Operating out of a century-old schoolhouse in the village of Long Pond, Pennsylvania, the conservancy’s bud Cook is working with local people and business leaders to balance economic growth with environmental protection. By forging partnerships with people like Francis Altemose, the Conservancy has been able to protect more than 14,000 acres of environmentally important land in the area.
    Altemose’s family has farmed in the Pocono area for generations. Two years ago Francis worked with the Conservancy to include his farm in a county farmland protection program. As a result, his family’s land can be protected from development and the Altemoses will be better able to provide a secure financial future for their 7-year-old grandson.
    Cook attributes the Conservancy’s success in the Poconos to having a local presence and a commitment to working with local residents
    “The key to protecting these remarkable lands is connecting with the local community,” Cook said. “The people who live there respect the land. They value quiet forests, clear streams and abundant wildlife. They are eager to help with conservation effort.
    For more information on how you can help the Nature Conservancy protect the Poconos and the world’s other “Last Great Places,” please call 1-888-564 6864 or visit us on the World Wide Web at www.tnc.org.

    We commonly think of sportsmanship in connection with athletic contests, but it also applies to individual outdoor sports. Not everyone who picks up a fishing rod or goes out with a gun is a sportsman. The sportsman first of all obeys the fish and game laws, not because he is liable to be punished as a violator, but because he knows that in the main these laws are made for his best interests.
    The following are some of the things that those who would qualify for membership in the sportsmanship fraternity (圈内人) will do.
    1) Take no more game than the bag limit provided for by the fish and game laws. The person who comes back from a trip boasting about the large number of fish or game taken is not a sportsman but a game hog (贪得无厌的捕猎者).
    2) Observe the unwritten rules of fair play. This means shooting game birds only when the birds are “on the wing”. For the same reason, do not use a shotgun to shoot a rabbit or similar animal while it is sitting or standing still.
    3) Be careful in removing illegal or undersized fish from the hook. This should be done only after wetting the hands. This is necessary because the body of the fish is covered with a thin, protective film which will stick to your dry hands. If the hands are dry when the fish is handled, the film is torn from the body of the fish. Without the protective film, the fish is more easily attacked by diseases. If you wish to release a fish that is hooked in such a way that it will be impossible to be close to the hook as convenient. In a remarkably short time, the hook will break down and the fish will remain almost unharmed. Fish have been known to feed successfully while hooks were still in their lips.
    4) Be sure of the identity of your target before you shoot. Many useful and harmless species of wildlife are thoughtlessly killed by the uninformed person who is out with a gun to kill whatever flies within range.

Directions: For this part, you are allowed 30 minutes to write a short essay in honor of teachers on the occasion of Teacher’s Day. You should write at least 120 words following the outline given below:
(1)向老师致以节日祝贺
(2)从一件难忘的事回忆老师的教诲和无私的奉献
(3)我如何回报老师的关爱

In honor of teachers on the occasion of Teacher’s Day