标题: 请教各位大牛OG13RC第7题！ [打印本页] 作者: raylu1987 时间: 2013-1-8 18:58 标题: 请教各位大牛OG13RC第7题！ Ecoefficiency (measures to minimize environmental impact through the reduction or elimination ofwaste from production processes) has become a goal for companies worldwide, with many realizing significant cost savings from such innovations. Peter Senge and Goran Carstedt see this development as laudable but suggest that simply adopting ecoefficiency innovations could actually worsen environmental stresses in the future. Such innovations reduce production waste but do not alter the number of products manufactured nor the waste generated from their use and discard; indeed, mostcompanies invest in ecoefficiency improvements in order to increase profits and growth. Moreover, there is no guarantee that increased economic growth from ecoefficiency will come in similarly ecoefficient ways, since in today's global markets, greater profits may be turned into investment capital that could easily be reinvested in old-style eco-inefficient industries. Even a vastly more ecoefficient industrial system could, were it to grow much larger,generate more total waste and destroy more habitat and species than would a smaller, less ecoefficient economy. Senge and Carstedt argue that to preserve the global environment and sustain economic growth, businesses must develop a new systemic approach that reduces total material use and total accumulated waste. Focusing exclusively on ecoefficiency, which offers a compelling business case according to established thinking, may distract companies from pursuing radically differentproducts and business models.
7.The passage implies that which of the following is a possible consequence of a company's adoption of innovations that increase its ecoefficiency?
(A) Company profits resulting from such innovations may be reinvested in that company with no guarantee that the company will continue to make further improvements in ecoefficiency.
(B) Company growth fostered by cost savings from such innovations may allow that company to manufacture a greater number of products that will be used and discarded, thus worsening environmental stress.
相反，B中的比较级，a greater number of我一直没在文中找到。文中只说，并不会改变（do not alter the number），而没有说会更多啊。作者: raylu1987 时间: 2013-1-9 09:26
顶下顶下~希望有大牛解答！作者: 大月威武 时间: 2013-1-13 17:16
尼玛，同问啊！作者: 大月威武 时间: 2013-1-13 17:18
楼上的，我看我们步调满统一，不如做个复习路上的好基友吧？作者: raylu1987 时间: 2013-1-15 16:45
楼上的，我看我们步调满统一，不如做个复习路上的好基友吧？
-- by 会员 大月威武 (2013/1/13 17:18:19)
我2月1号就考了。。。。作者: ninapan 时间: 2013-3-27 11:14
我也想要问〜作者: wusi343922710 时间: 2013-3-27 13:35
原文中
greater profits may
be turned into investment capital that could easily be
reinvested in old-style eco-inefficient industries.
只是表明由环保创新增加的利润可能会被再投资到传统的环境效率低的工业中。
选项A
Company profits resulting from such innovations
may be reinvested in that company with no
guarantee that the company will continue to
make further improvements in ecoefficiency.
no guarantee to make further improvement in ecoefficiency与原文表达的意思不符
关于B选项中的a greater number of，原文虽未交代，但可推理，环境效率的提高使单位产品对环境的污染降低，但利润的增加让企业生产更多的产品，总的污染并不一定比之前低，就好比一件商品单价降低了，但买的数量多了，最后你付的钱可能比原先还多。作者: ninapan 时间: 2013-3-30 00:04
Thank you!!!!!!!!!作者: 阿纠蒙太奇 时间: 2013-4-4 15:22
B选项还有这样一条吧，原文中 Line 21-23 generate more total waste and destroy more habitat and species than would a smaller, less ecoefficient economy. more比较级就体现了worsening environmental stress把，不知道对不对作者: fionaZhang1992 时间: 2014-2-6 12:18
想问一下大牛们C为什么不对?原文12行indeed...那一句意思不是说大多数公司是为了增加盈利才投资ecoefficiency的么，C说如果没有cost saving的公司就没有继续投资ecoefficiency的动机了？作者: coldplay_皓 时间: 2014-8-17 03:04
自己最开始对这个A也有很大的疑问。
我也来说说自己的看法吧，根据OG的解释
A. the passage suggests generally that ecoefficiency will increase companies's profits,
but there is no suggestion that these companies will therefore then abandon ecoefficiency as a goal.
(A).Company profits resulting from such innovations may be reinvested in that company
with no guarantee that the company will continue to make further improvements in ecoefficiency.
这样标注一下应该能够看出，主干是profits may be reinvested in company, 而with部分是做状语的，中文表示为 利润可能会在不保证这家公司会继续提高以后的ecoefficiency地情况下被再投入到这家公司，所以A答案这样看起来就很明了，原文只说了could easily be reinvested in old-style eco-inefficient industries, 完全没有提到 公司不会投入profit到今后的ecoefficiency的提高（原文只说 更多利润可能被用作再投资的资本），也就是OG解释的abandon ecoefficiency as a goal，所以，一切还是以OG解释为主啊啊啊！！！！
