Part A: Reading Comprehension

Text 3

Madrid was hailed as a public health guiding light last November when it rolled out ambitious restrictions on the most polluting cars. Seven months and one election day later, a new conservative city council suspended enforcement of the clean air zone, a first step toward its possible termination. Mayor José Luis Martínez-Almeida made opposition to the zone a centrepiece of his election campaign, despite its success in improving air quality. A judge has now overruled the city’s decision to stop levying fines, ordering them restored. But with legal battles ahead, the zone’s future looks uncertain at best.

Madrid’s back and forth on clean air is a pointed reminder of the limits to the patchwork, city-by-city approach that characterises efforts on air pollution across Europe, Britain very much included.

Among other weaknesses, the measures cities must employ when left to tackle dirty air on their own are politically controversial, and therefore vulnerable. That’s because they inevitably put the costs of cleaning the air on to individual drivers—who must pay fees or buy better vehicles—rather than on to the car manufacturers whose cheating is the real cause of our toxic pollution. It’s not hard to imagine a similar reversal happening in London. The new ultra-low emission zone (Ulez) is likely to be a big issue in next year’s mayoral election. And if Sadiq Khan wins and extends it to the North and South Circular roads in 2021 as he intends, it is sure to spark intense opposition from the far larger number of motorists who will then be affected.

It’s not that measures such as London’s Ulez are useless. Far from it. Local officials are using the levers that are available to them to safeguard residents’ health in the face of a serious threat. The zones do deliver some improvements to air quality, and the science tells us that means real health benefits.

But mayors and councilors can only do so much about a problem that is far bigger than any one city or town. They are acting because national governments—Britain’s and others across Europe—have failed to do so.

Restrictions that keep highly polluting cars out of certain areas—city centres, “school streets”, even individual roads—are a response to the absence of a larger effort to properly enforce existing regulations and require auto companies to bring their vehicles into compliance. Wales has introduced special low speed limits to minimise pollution. We’re doing everything but insist that manufacturers clean up their cars.

31. Which of the following is true about Madrid’s clean air zone?

[A]

Its effects are questionable. 

[B]

It has been opposed by a judge. 

[C]

It needs tougher enforcement. 

[D]

Its fate is yet to be decided. 

32. Which is considered a weakness of the city-level measures to tackle dirty air?

[A]

They are biased against car manufacturers. 

[B]

They prove impractical for city councils. 

[C]

They are deemed too mild for politicians. 

[D]

They put the burden on individual motorists. 

33. The author believes that the extension of London’s Ulez will

[A]

arouse strong resistance. 

[B]

ensure Khan’s electoral success. 

[C]

improve the city’s traffic. 

[D]

discourage car manufacturing. 

34. Who does the author think should have addressed the problem?

[A]

Local residents. 

[B]

Mayors. 

[C]

Councilors. 

[D]

National governments. 

35. It can be learned from the last paragraph that auto companies

[A]

will raise low-emission car production. 

[B]

should be forced to follow regulations. 

[C]

will upgrade the design of their vehicles. 

[D]

should be put under public supervision. 

答案解析 (Answers & Explanations)

31. [D] Its fate is yet to be decided.
解析：第一段描述了马德里清洁空气区的一波三折：新市政委员会暂停了它，但法官又推翻了这个暂停决定。最后一句总结：“但由于前面的法律斗争，该区域的未来充其量也是不确定的（the zone’s future looks uncertain at best）”。“未来不确定”对应选项D的“它的命运还有待决定（fate is yet to be decided）”。

32. [D] They put the burden on individual motorists.
解析：第三段明确指出了市级应对脏空气措施的弱点（weaknesses）。第二句说：“那是因为它们不可避免地把清洁空气的成本推给了个人司机（put the costs... on to individual drivers），他们必须交费或买更好的车……” 这个核心逻辑对应选项D“它们把负担加在了个人驾车者身上”。

33. [A] arouse strong resistance.
解析：第三段最后一句提到：“如果 Sadiq Khan 获胜并在 2021 年将其（伦敦超低排放区 Ulez）扩展到南北环路……它必然会引发届时受影响的极大量驾车者的强烈反对（spark intense opposition）”。“spark intense opposition”完美对应选项A的“引起强烈抵抗（arouse strong resistance）”。

34. [D] National governments.
解析：第五段作者指出，市长和议员们对这个远远大于任何城市的问题能做的很有限（only do so much）。紧接着解释原因：“他们正在采取行动是因为国家政府（national governments）……未能做到这一点（have failed to do so）”。言下之意，这本该是国家政府的责任。因此选D。

35. [B] should be forced to follow regulations.
解析：最后一段指出，各种限制排放的做法是对更大努力（larger effort）缺失的回应，这个“更大的努力”本应该去“适当地执行现有的规定并要求汽车公司使其车辆符合规定（require auto companies to bring their vehicles into compliance）”。最后一句作者还讽刺道：“我们什么都做了，却唯独没有坚持要求制造商清理他们的汽车（doing everything but insist that manufacturers clean up their cars）”。这表明作者认为“汽车公司应该被强迫遵守规定”，选B。

核心长难句精解 (High-Light)

1. 独立主格结构作状语与定语从句：
"But with legal battles ahead, the zone’s future looks uncertain at best."
【解析】`with + 名词 + 副词` 构成了 `with` 的复合结构（独立主格的一种），在此处作伴随或原因状语，表示“随着前方还有法律斗争”。这句简单利落地总结了马德里环保政策的僵局。

2. 复杂的表语从句及 rather than 引导的对比结构：
"That’s because they inevitably put the costs of cleaning the air on to individual drivers—who must pay fees or buy better vehicles—rather than on to the car manufacturers whose cheating is the real cause of our toxic pollution."
【解析】`because` 引导表语从句。核心谓语动词短语是 `put costs on to...`。`rather than` 极其鲜明地对比了成本的承担者：个体司机（带 who 定语从句修饰）vs 汽车制造商（带 whose 定语从句修饰，指出它们才是污染的真凶）。

3. 同位语及不定式复合结构：
"Restrictions that keep highly polluting cars out of certain areas... are a response to the absence of a larger effort to properly enforce existing regulations and require auto companies to bring their vehicles into compliance."
【解析】主干是 `Restrictions... are a response to the absence...`。介词 `of` 后面带了一个长长的名词短语。在这个名词短语中，两个由 `and` 连接的不定式短语 `to enforce` 和 `(to) require` 共同作后置定语，修饰 `effort`，点明了缺乏的究竟是什么行动。