议论文练习-备战2020年高考英语阅读理解专项训练1We may think were a culture that gets rid of our worn technology at the first sight of something shiny and new，but a new study shows that we keep using our old devices(装置) well after they go out of style. Thats bad news for the environment and our wallets as these outdated devices consume much more energy than the newer ones that do the same things. To figure out how much power these devices are using，Callie Babbitt and her colleagues at the Rochester Institute of Technology in New York tracked the environmental costs for each product throughout its life from when its minerals are mined to when we stop using the device. This method provided a readout for how home energy use has evolved since the early 1990s. Devices were grouped by generation. Desktop computers，basic mobile phones，and box-set TVs defined 1992. Digital cameras arrived on the scene in 1997. And MP3 players， smart phones， and LCD TVs entered homes in 2002，before tablets and e-readers showed up in 2007. As we accumulated more devices，however，we didnt throw out our old ones. The living-room television is replaced and gets planted in the kids room， and suddenly one day， you have a TV in every room of the house， said one researcher. The average number of electronic devices rose from four per household in 1992 to 13 in 2007. Were not just keeping these old devices we continue to use them. According to the analysis of Babbitts team， old desktop monitors and box TVs with cathode ray tubes are the worst devices with their energy consumption and contribution to greenhouse gas emissions（排放）more than doubling during the 1992 to 2007 window. So whats the solution（解决方案）? The teams data only went up to 2007， but the researchers also explored what would happen if consumers replaced old products with new electronics that serve more than one function， such as a tablet for word processing and TV viewing. They found that more on-demand entertainment viewing on tablets instead of TVs and desktop computers could cut energy consumption by 44%. 32. What does the author think of new devices?A. They are environment-friendly. B. They are no better than the old. C. They cost more to use at home. D. They go out of style quickly. 33. Why did Babbitts team conduct the research?A. To reduce the cost of minerals. B. To test the life cycle of a product. C. To update consumers on new technology. D. To find out electricity consumption of the devices. 34. Which of the following uses the least energy?A. The box-set TV. B. The tablet. C. The LCD TV. D. The desktop computer. 35. What does the text suggest people do about old electronic devices?A. Stop using them. B. Take them apart. C. Upgrade them. D. Recycle them. 2The possibility of self-driving robot cars has often seemed like a futurists dream, years away from coming into reality in the real world. Well, the future is apparently now. The California Department of Motor Vehicles began giving permits in April for companies to test truly self-driving cars on public roads. The state also cleared the way for companies to sell or rent out self-driving cars, and for companies to operate driverless taxi services. California, it should be noted, isnt leading the way here. Companies have been testing their cars in cities across the country. Its hard to predict when driverless cars will be everywhere on our roads. But however long it takes, the technology may change our transportation systems and our cities, for better or for worse, depending on how the transformation is managed.While much of the debate so far has been focused on the safety of driverless cars, policymakers should be talking more about how self-driving cars can help reduce traffic jams, cut emissions(排放)and offer more convenient and affordable choices to move around. The arrival of driverless cars is a chance to make sure that those cars are environmentally friendly and more shared.Do we want to copy or even worsen the traffic of today with driverless cars? Imagine a future where most adults own their self-driving cars. They accept long, slow journeys to and from work on crowded highways because they can work, entertain themselves or sleep on the ride. They take their driverless car to a date and set the empty car to circle the building to avoid paying for parking. Instead of walking a few blocks to pick up a child or the dry cleaning, they send the self-driving minibus. The convenience even leads fewer people to take public transport an unwelcome side effect researchers have already found in ride-hailing(网约车)services. Policymakers should start thinking now about how to make sure the appearance of driverless cars doesnt worsen the transportation system we have today. The coming technological development presents a chance for cities and states to develop transportation systems designed to move more people, and more affordably. The car of the future is com