题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
[主观题]
In the Exxon Valdez oil spill about______kilometer of coastline was polluted.
答案
查看答案
重要提示：请勿将账号共享给其他人使用，违者账号将被封禁！
查看《购买须知》>>>
请输入或粘贴题目内容
搜题
拍照、语音搜题，请扫码下载APP
题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
答案
更多“In the Exxon Valdez oil spill about______kilometer of coastline was polluted.”相关的问题
第1题
The crashing of the Sea Empress was a disaster, but it gets worse. A lot of the oil washed up on the shores of Milford Haven Estuary, a conservation area for birds and other wildlife close to where the ship crashed. This made many residents and nature lovers around the world very angry.
Oil and Water
People are upset because oil spills happen regularly. In North America, there are over 8000 spills each year. Not all of them are as big as the one caused by the Sea Empress. Most spills are quite small—they happen in marinas(小船坞) when motor boats fill up with gasoline. Bigger spills occur when oil barrels are accidentally dumped and when ships clean out their cargo holds. But no matter how much oil ends up in the water, plants and animals suffer or die.
In 1989, after an oil tanker called the Exxon Valdez spilled its load in Prince William Sound near Alaska, 425,000 sea birds died along with thousands of other animals, including sea otters. This ship dumped only half the oil the Sea Empress did! The Exxon spill covered 880 km of ocean and fouled about 2000 km of coastline. That's enough coastline to reach from Montreal all the way to Winnipeg.
Cleaning Up the Mess
When oil is spilled on water it forms a sheen. That's a very thin layer of oil that sits on top of the water's surface. One of the jobs of clean-up crews is to try to keep the sheen from spreading out to sea. The tool they use is a containment boom(栅栏网). They wrap this boom around the oil spill to keep it in place. Once the oil has been contained it can be burned off the water.
Another way to get rid of the oil is to sprinkle it with a product that absorbs it, like wood waste. The waste is then scooped away before it sinks. Naturally, some oil always escapes out to sea. Eventually, the oil breaks down and forms tar balls. These balls sink to the ocean floor, then sooner or later they are washed up onto shore.
With every oil spill, some oil reaches the shoreline. The mess is unbelievable. When cleaning up a spill, the hardest job is dealing with the onshore pollution. When oil lands on rocks or mixes with sand and seaweed, it becomes really difficult to remove. Volunteers use high-pressure hoses to blast the oil with hot water. They try to push the oil back into the water. If it's in the water they can burn it or skim it off the surface.
Caring for the Animals
After an oil spill, a lot of concerned people volunteer to help care for the animals. Very little can be done to save the crustaceans, mollusks(软体动物), and other small creatures that get smothered in oil. But the larger animals that are caught and cleaned can be saved.
Birds like western grebe need to have their feathers washed to survive. They’re given baths with plenty of soap and are scrubbed down using toothbrushes. Turtles, otters, and all kinds of other large animals go through the same process. Everyone's hard work pays off. Many animals are saved. But the pollution has a lasting effect—it gets into the food web and makes a lot of animals(including people) sick. Birds, fish, and scav
A．Y
B．N
C．NG
第2题
Engineering Ethics
Engineering ethics is attracting increasing interest in engineering universities throughout the nation. At Texas A&M University, evidence of this interest in professional ethics culminated in the creation of a new course in engineering ethics, as well as a project funded by the National Science Foundation to develop material for introducing ethical issues into required undergraduate engineering courses. A small group of faculty and administrators actively supported the growing effort at Texas A&M, yet this group must now expand to meet the needs of increasing numbers of students wishing to learn more about the value implications of their actions as professional engineers.
The increasing concern for the value dimension of engineering is, at 1east in part, a result of the attention that the media has given to cases such as the Challenger disaster, the Kansas City Hyatt-Regency Hotel walkways collapse, and the Exxon oil spill. As a response to this concern, a new discipline, engineering ethics, is emerging. This discipline will doubtless take its place alongside such well-established fields as medical ethics, business ethics, and legal ethics.
The problem presented by this development is that most engineering professors are not prepared to introduce literature in engineering ethics into their classrooms. They are most comfortable with quantitative concepts and often do not believe they are qualified to lead class discussions on ethics. Many engineering faculty members do not think that they have the time in an already overcrowded syllabus to introduce discussions on professional ethics, or the time in their own schedules to prepare the necessary material. Hopefully, the resources presented herein will be of assistance.
Engineering ethics is a compulsory subject in every institute of science and technology in the United States.
A．Right
B．Wrong
C．Not mentioned
第3题
MINUTES OF THE MEETING
BM#104
Monthly Meeting of the Advisory Committee
on Affirmative Action
Call to order: Ms. Karen Powers, President
Present: Susan Branch, Kathleen Goodwin, Karen Molzan, Margaret Murphy, Roger Wells & David Sallisbury
Apologies for absence; Luella Kraft, Mark Nolan & Marianna Valdez
Time: 3: 00 p. m. on Friday, August 15, 2009
Venue: Building B, Room 202
Minutes Keeper: Jane Stella, Secretary Page: 1\1
Contents:
1. The minutes of the July meeting were read and approved with the following correction; David Sallisnury was added to the list of members present and deleted from the list of members absent.
2. President Powers read the special Report of the Task Force on Affirmative Action. After Questions, the report was filed for future reference.
3. Ms. Branch, Treasurer, read the Treasurer's report. The balance for July, $5, 215. 67, included $5, 000 allocation for the new fiscal year. The report was accepted and placed on file.
4. After a lengthy discussion on the value of conducting workshops on sexual harassment, Branch moved and Powers seconded that the Committee recommend that the company provided a series of workshops on understanding and eliminating sexual harassment in the workplace. Moton carried. Branch volunteered to write a draft of the proposal for management in time for the September meeting.
5. The meeting for September will be at 4: 00 p. m. on the 24th instead of 3: 00 p. m. to accommodate members who will be attending the luncheon with the CEO.
6. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4: 40 p. m.
How many people were present when the minutes of the July meeting began to be read？
A．9
B．8
C．5
D．3
第4题
If you watch the news, you hear at all the time about the Dow Jones 【S1】______
Industrial Average and other averages that like the S＆P 500 or the 【S2】______
Russel 2000. These are "market averages" designed to tell you how
companies are traded on the stock market are doing in general. 【S3】______
The Dow Jones Industrial Average is simply the average value of 30
large, and industrial stocks. Big companies like General Motors, 【S4】______
Goodyear, IBM and Exxon are the kinds of companies that make up
this index. See this page for details on how that the average is 【S5】______
calculated. See this page for a list of the companies in the average.
The thing to understand is that the Dow Jones Industrial Average is
nothing magic--which someone has chosen 30 companies and 【S6】______
he averaged their values together by following a specific formula. 【S7】______
That's all what it is. 【S8】______
There are all sorts of averages out there. The S＆P 500 is the average
value of 500 different large companies. But the Russel 2000 tracks 【S9】______
the average of 2,000 smaller companies. And there are others.
What these averages tell you is the general health of stock prices as 【S10】______
a whole. If the economy is "doing well", then the prices of stocks as a 【S11】______
group tend to rise. If it is "doing poorly", prices as a group tend to fall.
The averages show you these tendencies in the market as a whole. If
a specific stock is going down but while the market as a whole is going 【S12】______
up, that tells you something. Or if a stock is rising, but is rising faster
or slower than the market as a whole, that tells you something as well.
【S1】______
第5题
The authorities have noticed a marked increase in "chatter". They have also picked up specific threats— some of them, it seems, to do with hijacking aircraft and crashing them into buildings. The targets reportedly included some big cities, for example, Las Vegas is a particular worry, but more obscure places were also chattered about, including Rappahannock County, or perhaps the town of Tappahannock, both in rural Virginia, and Valdez, in Alaska. The point of any such terrorism would be to make sure that no American anywhere felt safe.
A particular focus of concern has been flights from abroad. Air France canceled six flights between Paris and Los Angeles at American government's request. French authorities questioned and released a dozen or so passengers but several people with tickets, including one who was reportedly a trained pilot, failed to turn up for the flight. On December 29th some international airlines were ordered to place armed air marshals on flights over the United States.
On top of all this, there have also been more familiar signs of security being beefed up at nuclear plants, ports and other possible targets. Surface-to-air missiles have once again been conspicuously deployed in Washington, DC.
Inevitably, some people have begun to question whether putting the country on such a high state of readiness is worth it. The process costs about $1 billion a week. Critics worry that people will become unconcerned about repeated security alerts. They also complain about the government sending mixed signals: telling Americans they are in great jeopardy(危险) but also that they should go about their business as normal. However, the critics may be too fussy(挑剔的). It is extremely hard to see what else the government could have done without either ignoring credible threats or creating mass panic. This may be the only way to face the possible threats.
Why did officials appear more worried about the terror alert this time？
A．Because the raise of terror alert was in the seasonal festivities this time.
B．Because it was the fifth time to raise the terror alert to code orange.
C．Because terror alert would be kept at this level for a period of time.
D．Because officials in the Department of Defense all agreed on the decision.
第6题
Oil prices have raised overall consumer prices and cut into household purchasing power. So far the higher costs haven't deterred(阻止) buying, even buying of cars and other energy-sensitive items. The major reason for the lack of reaction is that oil is less important to the economy than it once was. Oil, which produced 45% of world energy in 1971, accounted for only 35% in 2003, with increases in nuclear and natural gas use making up the difference.
GM, Ford, and Chrysler suffered as buyers shifted to more fuel-efficient vehicles from Toyota and Honda, but the shift was hot pronounced. Admittedly, light truck sales are holding up in part because manufacturers are offering large discounts to "move the metal", but the fact that buyers are responding to those incentives shows they aren't too scared of gas prices.
Americans continue to spend more than they earn, but gasoline prices will have an effect. Although the April chain store results suggest gasoline prices aren't hurting much yet, eventually Americans will be forced to realize that they have to slow down. We expect the economy to slow in the second half of the year as the impact of higher oil prices sinks in. How much the economy slows will depend on how high oil prices remain. We expect some drop in oil prices by yearend, but I have been saying that for so long even I am starting not to believe it.
The anger against the oil companies is clearly misplaced. Exxon and friends control only a small share of world oil reserves. Most are now in the hands of state-owned oil companies. The recent move by Bolivia to nationalize its industry is only the latest in a long line of similar actions. The history of these enterprises is one of severe underinvestment and mismanagement, which tends to reduce supply and keep prices high. The risk on oil prices is primarily on the high side of our forecast.
Although I think oil prices will drop back in the medium term, to address my serious worries, I'm buying my wife a bike for Mothers' Day.
The economy at the beginning of 2006 is not affected by the high oil price mainly because ______.
A．the warm winter requires less oil to run the heaters
B．the warm winter promotes consumption, across the country
C．people believe that the oil price will drop in near future
D．people don't think the high price will make much of a difference
第7题
Any tally of CEO pay suggests jarring disproportion. The Post recently reported the 100 best paid executives in its region. The highest received $39.6 million, and all the top 20 exceeded $10 million. Fortune magazine ran a scathing pay story in its latest issue illustrated by these examples: $405 million to retired Exxon Mobil chairman Lee Raymond (his 2005 pay, plus the value of his pension and stock grants); $90 million to Franklin Raines, the former chief executive of Fannie Mae (his compensation from 1998 to 2003); $99 million to Hank McKinnell, the CEO of Pfizer (2005 pay plus his pension's value).
The minority of CEOs who deserve massive payouts (because they contributed uniquely to a company's success) or whose pay is properly restrained are tainted by their peers. The Business Roundtable, a group of 160 CEOs, argues that a few huge pay packages create a distorted picture. Not really. Consider a Business Roundtable study, using data that Mercer Human Resource Consulting collected on 350 major companies. The idea was to examine median CEOs—those in the middle—as typical. Here's what the study found:
From 1995 to 2005 median CEO compensation at these companies rose 151 percent, from $2.7 million to $6.8 million (the figure included base salary, bonuses, stock options and other "incentives"—but not pensions).
In the same period, the median sales of these companies increased 51 percent, to $7.6 billion, and the median profits 126 percent, to $591 million.
By contrast, the median pay increase for full-time, year-round workers ages 25 to 64 in these years was only 32 percent, to $38,223 (that's all workers, not just those at the study's firms).
Remember, these are run-of-the-mill CEOs, not the superstars or the supergreedy. Even they seem to regard being a multimillionaire as an entitlement befitting their position. From 1995 to 2005 their pay rose five times faster than the typical worker's. In 1995, median CEO pay was 94 times median worker pay; by 2005 it was 179 times as much.
How CEOs are paid—their incentives—matters, for them and society
Through the 1970s, CEOs were the ultimate Organization Men. Usually company careerists, they were compensated mainly "like bureaucrats in the sense that they were primarily paid for increasing the size of their organizations," economists Michael Jensen and Kevin Murphy argued in several studies in 1990. Because pay increased with company size, CEOs often created ever expanding, unwieldy and inefficient conglomerates. This approach was bad for America and for shareholders.
Recognition of that led to change. Compensation for CEOs and other top executives in the 1980s and 1990s was increasingly tied to a company's stock performance. The aim was to motivate executives to improve efficiency and profitability, driving up the firm's share price. The usual instruments were stock options: the right to buy shares at a fixed price (called the "strike price"). A CEO might receive an option to buy 100,000 shares of stock at $10 a share. If the price went to $30, the executive could instantly make $2 million (shares bought at $10 can be sold at $30).
In the 1970s most CEO compensation was cash; by 2000 half or more often consisted of stock grants. Up to a point, the shift succeeded. It rewarded good management. But it also inspired abuses, because option grants were excessive and unconditional (providing huge windfalls
第8题
Can Business Be Cool？
Why a growing number of firms are taking global warming seriously.
Companies supporting environment protection
Rupert Murdoch is no green activist. But in Pebble Beach later this summer, the annual gathering of executives of Mr Murdoch's News Corporation--which last year led to a dramatic shift in the media conglomerate's attitude to the Internet--will be addressed by several leading environmentalists, including a vice-president turned climate-change movie star. Last month BSkyB, a British satellitetelevision company chaired by Mr. Murdoch and run by his son, James, declared itself "carbon-neutral", having taken various steps to cut or offset its discharges of carbon into the atmosphere.
The army of corporate greens is growing fast. Late last year HSBC became the first big bank to announce that it was carbon-neutral, joining other financial institutions, including Swiss Re, a reinsurer, and Goldman Sachs, an investment bank, in waging war on climate-warming gases (of which carbon dioxide is the main culprit). Last year General Electric (GE), an industrial powerhouse, launched its "Ecomagination" strategy, aiming to cut its output of greenhouse gases and to invest heavily in clean (i.e., carbon-free) technologies. In October Wal-Mart announced a series of environmental schemes, including doubling the fuel-efficiency of its fleet of vehicles within a decade. Tesco and Sainsbury, two Of Britain's biggest retailers, are competing fiercely to be the greenest. And on June 7th some leading British bosses lobbied Tony Blair for a more ambitious policy on climate change, even if that involves harsher regulation.
The other side
The greening of business is by no means universal, however. Money from Exxon Mobil, Ford and General Motors helped pay for television advertisements aired recently in America by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, with the daft slogan "Carbon dioxide: they call it pollution; we call it life". Besides, environmentalist critics say, some firms are engaged in superficial "greenwash to boost the image of essentially climate-hurting businesses. Take BP, the most prominent corporate advocate of action on climate change, with its "Beyond Petroleum" ad campaign, high-profile investments in green energy, and even a "carbon calculator" on its websites helps consumers measure their personal "carbon footprint", or overall emissions of carbon. Yet, critics complain, BP's recent record profits are largely thanks to sales of huge amounts of carbon-packed oil and gas.
On the other hand, some free-market thinkers see the support of firms for regulation of carbon as the latest attempt at "regulatory capture", by those who stand to profit from new rules. Max Schulz of the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank, notes darkly that "Enron was into pushing the idea of climate change, because it was good for its business".
Others argue that climate change has no more place in corporate boardrooms than do discussions of other partisan political issues, such as Darfur or gay marriage. That criticism, at least, is surely wrong. Most of the corporate converts say they are acting not out of some vague sense of social responsibility, or even personal angst, but because climate change creates real business risks and opportunities—from regulatory compliance to insuring clients on flood plains. And although these concerns vary hugely from one company to the next, few firms can be sure of remaining unaffected.
The climate of opinion
The most obvious risk is of rising energy costs. Indeed, the recent high price of oil and natural gas, allied to fears over the security of energy supplies from the Middle East and Russia—neither of which have anything to de with climate change—may be the main reason why many firms have recently become interested in alternative energy sources. But at the same tim
A．Y
B．N
C．NG
第9题
I believe he is sincere in wanting to focus efforts more on pursuing alternative energy sources. But his Texas roots, his high-profile advocacy of opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling, and other associations with the oil industry have created long-standing public impressions that the President is an oilman who believes in the oil economy.
Bush's predicament mirrors the nation's own love-hate relationship with 0il. For decades the energy debate in the U. S. has pitted so-called pro-oil realists against idealistic advocates of alternative energy. The pro-oil commentators have attempted to discredit alternatives by saying they make up a tiny share of energy consumed and that dependence on oil is a choice of the marketplace. They assert that our government can and should do little to change this. Former Exxon CEO Lee Raymond echoed such reasoning in 2005, when he noted that in 25 years, even with double-digit growth rates, alternatives like wind and solar power will still provide less than 1% of the energy needed to meet worldwide demand. "I am more interested in staying focused on the 99% ," he said.
Yes, advocates of alternative energy must resist the temptation to suggest that energy problems are easily solved. They are not. Relieving our dependence on oil is going to take huge investments of time, money, and political will. But the difficulty of solving the problem doesn't make doing so any less necessary. With less than 5% of the world's population, the U. S. consumes 25% of its oil and will spend about $320 billion on oil imports this year. Most of the world's oil is concentrated in places either hostile to U. S. interests or vulnerable to political upheaval or terrorism.
Given that sobering outlook, I believe the balance of realism has passed from those who argue on behalf of oil and a laissez-faire energy policy relying on market evolution to those who recognize that life in America will be far more difficult in coming decades unless there is a major reorientation in the way we get our energy. No one who cares about U. S. foreign policy and long-term economic growth can ignore what is happening in Iran, Russia, or Venezuela. And no one who is honestly assessing the decline of American leverage around the world due to our energy dependence can fail to see that oil is the albatross of U. S. national security.
We need an urgent campaign, led by a succession of committed Presidents and Congresses, to promote alternative sources. We could take our time if this were simply a matter of managing an industrial conversion to more cost-effective technologies. Unfortunately, U. S. dependence on ever scarcer fossil fuels has already created conditions that threaten our security and prosperity and undermine international stability.
Most of the world's oil and gas is not controlled by those who respect market forces. Foreign governments control up to 77% of world oil reserves via national oil companies, which set prices through production decisions—and can easily shut off the taps for political reasons.
I am not suggesting that markets won't someday come into play to stanch America's oil dependence. Eventually, because of scarcity, terrorist attacks, market shocks, and foreign manipulation, the high price of oil will lead to enormous investment in, and political support for, alternatives. The problem is that such investment won't happen overnight. Even if it did, building supporting infrastructure and changing behavior. could take decades. In other words, by the time a sustained energy crisis ful
A．refute the criticism by some commentators
B．highlight his Texas roots, advocacy of Arctic drilling, and other associations with the oil industry
C．call for more efforts on pursuing alternative energy sources
D．change the long-standing public impression that he is an oilman who believes in the oil economy
