At the close of the Kyoto Global-Warming Treaty discussions held in Bonn last week, exhausted negotiators from nearly every country on earth had reason to be proud. They had done what no one expected--they reached a breakthrough agreement to limit greenhouse gases. During the concluding remarks, as each speaker praised the next, only the chief U.S. official on the scene drew an undiplomatic response. When Paula Dobriansky told the gathering that the Bush Administration "will not abdicate our responsibility" to address global warming, the hall filled with boos. That's because the U.S., the world's largest producer of greenhouse gases, sat on the sidelines in Bonn.

　　George W. Bush has yet to decide what, if anything, he will do to combat global warming. But he believes the Kyoto treaty is fatally flawed because it doesn't require developing countries to limit their fossil-fuel use immediately, as it does industrialized countries. So he kept the U.S. out of the discussions. In doing so, the Administration may have lost its last opportunity to help shape the international response to the problem. And Bush may be in danger of losing control over climate action domestically. After months of internal debate, the Administration is still "consulting" on the issue.

　　That noise you hear is Congress rushing to fill the leadership vacuum. At least six climate plans have been proposed so far. The first is sponsored by former Republican, now Independent Senator Jim Jeffords, chairman of the Senate Environment Committee, who proposes to cut greenhouse-gas emissions from power plants. Congressional action this week will center on reducing emissions by raising vehicle fuel-efficiency standards, including those for SUVs. If SUVs had to meet the same standards as cars--something Massachusetts Representative Ed Markey will propose this week--they could save consumers an estimated $7 billion at the pump this year and cut gasoline demand by tens of billions of gallons over 10 years.

　　The "drill Detroit, not the Arctic" campaign will find some support this week when the National Academy of Sciences releases a long-awaited study. The report, toned down after the auto industry protested that raising fuel-efficiency standards, by making cars lighter, makes vehicles less safe, is still likely to conclude that fuel efficiency can be increased at least 25% with existing technology.

　　If a fuel-efficiency bill reaches his desk, Bush could be in a bind--caught between auto lobbyists (his chief of staff used to be one) and his concern for energy security. With new technology putting impressive fuel efficiency within reach, it will be hard for him to oppose measures that could reduce the national appetite for foreign oil by millions of barrels a year.

1.In the opening paragraph, the author introduces his topic by
　　[A] making a comparison.
　　[B]justifying as an assumption.
　　[C]posing a contrast.
　　[D]explaining a phenomenon.

2.The statement “sat on the sidelines” (Line 7, Paragraph 1) means
　　[A]not sitting together with the representatives from other countries.
　　[B]not taking part in the activity even though they should do.
　　[C]not getting involved in the discussion.
　　[D]not paying attention to the international affair.

3.Bush kept U.S. out of the discussions because he believes
　　[A]the industrialized countries should not shoulder the responsibility alone.
　　[B]developing countries fail to meet the same requirement.
　　[C]the industrialized countries seem to share more in tacking this issue.
　　[D]the developing countries should not be included.

4.The National Academy of Sciences found in the study that
　　[A]the auto industry should not raise the fuel efficiency standards.
　　[B]the lighter car is not safe enough.
　　[C]the existing technology can increase the fuel efficiency.
　　[D]the lighter the car is, the less safety it will be.

5.What can we learn from the last paragraph?
　　[A]New technology can help Bush out of trouble.
　　[B]Bush intends to stir the national appetite for foreign oil.
　　[C]Auto lobbyists have different ideas from Bush.
　　[D]Bush fails to deal with the subtle situation.

　　答案：CBACB

　　篇章剖析

　　本文采用提出问题——分析问题的模式。文章从布什政府对《京都议定书》的反应入手，分析了布什这么做的原因以及在国内产生的影响和后果。第一段指出布什政府在波恩会议上的局外人的态度；第二段指出其原因以及造成的后果；第三段和第四段指出在美国国内提出的有关限制温室气体排放的建议；第五段指出布什所处的进退两难的境地。

　　词汇注释

　　Dubya《美国未来词典》最鲜明的特色就是拿布什“开涮”，该词典将“乔治·Ｗ·布什”名字中的“Ｗ”挑出来，以其谐意称总统为“达不溜”（ｄｕｂｙａ）。

　　SUVs（sport utility vehicles）越野车，运动休闲车

　　at the close of n.在...结束时,在...末

　　the Kyoto Global-Warming Treaty为了人类免受气候变暖的威胁，１９９７年１２月，在日本京都召开的《联合国气候变化框架公约》缔约方第三次会议通过了旨在限制发达国家温室气体排放量以抑制全球变暖的《京都议定书》。

　　Bonn[bCn]n.波恩(原西德首都,位于莱茵河畔)

　　on the scene出现；登场

　　undiplomatic adj无外交策略的

　　abdicate v.退位, 放弃(职位,权力等)

　　address vt.从事, 忙于

　　boo[5bu:]v.作嘘声int.嘘!

　　sideline[5saIdlaIn]n.副业, 边界线, 兼职, 附带销售的货物, 局外人的观点

　　tone down v.降低, 柔和, 缓和

　　in a bind adv.处于困境

　　lobbyist[5lRbIIst]n.活动议案通过者, 说客

　　chief of staff n.(陆海空军的)参谋长,<美>(陆空军)司令

　　难句突破

　　1．The report, toned down after the auto industry protested that raising fuel-efficiency standards, by making cars lighter, makes vehicles less safe, is still likely to conclude that fuel efficiency can be increased at least 25% with existing technology.

　　主体句式：The report … is still likely to conclude that …

　　结构分析：这句话的主语是report，后面跟的过去分词toned down做伴随状语来修饰the report; toned down后面又跟了after引导的时间状语从句，从句中又有一个that引导的宾语从句，宾语从句中raising fuel-efficiency standards是主语，by making cars lighter来修饰之；这句话的谓语是is still likely…;谓语后又跟了一个that引导的宾语从句。

　　句子译文：由于汽车生产企业的抗议——通过减轻车身的重量来提高燃油效率的标准这种做法会使汽车的安全性降低，这项报导处以低调，但仍可能得出这样的结论：现在的科技水平能使燃料效率至少提高25%。

　　题目分析

　　1． 答案为C，属事实细节题。作者以布什政府和与会代表就《京都议定书》的不同反应为切入点，意在指出美国政府的局外人态度。

　　2．答案为B，属推理判断题。从第一段“the hall filled with boos”我们知道全场对美国代表的发言发出唏嘘声，其中不乏不满、意外、责备等情感因素。后作者又做出解释：“That's because the U.S., the world's largest producer of gree