何凯文每日一句第222句-227句.docx

222.先来看看昨天题目的解析：All sorts of firms are changing theirinputs and processes and designing products that spare the environment, whilehelping suppliers do the same.各种类型的公司都在改变他们物料投入以及加工方式（inputs and processes），在产品设计上也更有利于环境。（spare the environment放过环境：对环境有利），同时也在帮助供应商做同样的事情。IKEA, a Swedish retailer, will haveinvested or committed to invest €1.5 billion ($1.7 billion) in wind and solarpower by the end of 2015, and the firm and its charitable foundation have justpledged a further €1 billion to developing renewable energy and to helpingpeople in places affected by climate change.宜家家居，一家瑞典的零售商，将在2015年底前投入或承诺投入15亿欧元（17亿美金）在风能或者太阳能上，公司和其慈善基金会也承诺（pledge）继续在可更新能源方面投入10亿欧元以帮助那些受气候影响的地区的人们。Firms say that besides savings from greaterenergy efficiency they gain less quantifiable（难以量化的，无形的） benefitsfrom an enhanced reputation, a motivated workforce and the like.公司说除开能从更有效的能源利用中获得收益之外，还能获得如更好的声誉，更有活力的员工等无形的收益。But big, disruptive investments in newenergy sources or industrial techniques may take years to justify their costs,if they ever do. Is greenery paying off?但是如果这些公司即使这样做了，在新能源和工业技术方面大额的甚至是颠覆性的投资需要好些年才能被证明是合理的。在“绿色”上的投资会有回报吗？The IKEA Company is mentioned to show that________(A) it is crucial to invest in disruptiveand motivated workforce.(B) the company can earn much from theenhanced reputation.(C) the firms have made their producingmethod more sustainable.(D) it is hard to tell the greenery ispaying off or not in years to come.例证题的错误都是定位错误！！！A和B就是我自己从例子中的词汇胡乱拼凑的，当然上当的人也少。矛盾还是集中在C和D这两个选项上：选Ｃ就是定位到了第一句；（或者自己读例子，读的比较懂，然后觉得Ｃ是正确的，但是我不建议大家这样做，因为一个例子可以说明很多结论，而且这些结论都可能是合理的。作者当然只想说明其中的一个结论。你这次得出的结论可能和作者的结论一致，但不能保证每次你都一致吧。所以最安全的办法还是要从原文中直接寻找对应的结论。）选Ｄ的同学定位到了最后一句；你仔细看下译文你就知道了，倒数第二句开头就是but;结论1+例子；But 结论2,这个时候例子肯定是说明结论1的啊。你就是读例子本身也可以知道不能说明D的结论啊！记住：例证题的错误都是定位错误！！！今天的任务：The energy companies are coming under increased pressure fromthe government to pass on falls in wholesale gas prices and toslash consumers’ gas and electricity bills.Amber Rudd, the newly appointed energy and climate changesecreta