Exercise 80
IELTS Reading: true, false, not given
Read the following passage about cities and the environment.
It’s easy to see why economists would embrace cities, warts and all, as engines of
prosperity. It has taken a bit longer for environmentalists. By increasing income, cities
increase consumption and pollution too. If what you value most is nature, cities look like
concentrated piles of damage - until you consider the alternative, which is spreading the
damage. From an ecological standpoint, says Stewart Brand, founder of the Whole Earth
Catalog, a back-to-the-land ethic would be disastrous. Cities allow half of humanity to live
on around 4 percent of the arable land, leaving more space for open country.
Per capita, city dwellers tread more lightly in other ways as well, as David Owen explains in
Green Metropolis. Their roads, sewers, and power lines are shorter and so use fewer
resources. Their apartments take less energy to heat, cool, and light than do houses. Most
important, people in dense cities drive less. Their destinations are close enough to walk to,
and enough people are going to the same places to make public transit practical. In cities
like New York, per capita energy use and carbon emissions are much lower than the
national average.
Are the following statements true, false, or not given?
1) Both economists and environmentalists may now see the benefits of cities.
2) A return to rural living would be a bad idea ecologically speaking.
3) City dwellers are more environmentally aware than the average person.
Simon 128 IELTS reading exercises
Compiled by Ulugbek Yusupov
Created by Proper English School +998 90 770-99-77 Page 46
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |