在职攻硕英语考试

【单选题】Our trouble lies in a simple confusion, one to which economists have been prone since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. Growth and ecology operate by different rules.Economists tend to assume that every problem of scarcity can be solved by substitution, by replacing tuna with tilapia, without factoring in the long-term environmental implications of either.But whereas economies might expand, ecosystems do not. They change—pine gives way to oak, coyotes arrive in NewEngland—and they reproduce themselves, but they do not increase in extent or abundance year after year. Most economists think of scarcity as a labor problem. Imagining that only energy and technology place limits on production. To harvest more wood, build a better chain saw; to pump more oil, drill more wells; to get more food, invent pest-resistant plants.
That logic thrived on new frontiers and more intensive production, and it held off the prophets of scarcity—from Thomas Robert Malthus to PaulEhrlich—whose predictions of famine and shortage have not come to pass. TheAgricultural Revolution that began in seventeenth-centuryEngland radically increased the amount of food that could be grown on an acre of land, and the same happened in the 1960s and 1970s when fertilizer and hybridized seeds arrived in India and Mexico.But the picture looks entirely different when we change the scale. Industrial society is roughly 250 years olD、make the last ten thousand years equal to twenty-four hours, and we have been producing consumer goods andCO₂ for only the last thirty-six minutes.Do the same for the past 1 million years of human evolution, and every thing from the steam engine to the search engine fits into the past twenty-one seconds. If we are not careful, hunting and gathering will look like a far more successful strategy of survival than economic growth. The latter has changed so much about the earth and human societies in so little time that it makes more sense to be cautious than triumphant.
Although food scarcity, when it occurs, is a localized problem, other kinds of scarcity are already here. Groundwater is alarmingly low in regions all over the world, but the most immediate threat to growth is surely petroleum.
What does the author think of ecosystems
A、They may deteriorate.
B、They may benefit from economy.
C、They are associated with productivity.
D、They are closely related to technology.
网考网参考答案：A
网考网解析：
[解析] 考查作者认为生态系统会怎样。根据第一段中的“But whereas economies might expand，ecosystems do not．”可知，作者认为经济能增长，但生态系统却没有。后面又列举出为了砍伐的木材更多，造出更好的链锯；为了开采更多的石油，钻出更多的油井；为了获得更多的食物，发明了抗虫害的农作物。这些都表明了对资源的无限索 取终将导致生态系统被破坏，因此A项为正确答案。 document.getElementById("warp").style.display="none"; document.getElementById("content").style.display="block"; 查看试题解析出处>>