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?
32. Which is considered a weakness of the city-level measures to tackle dirty air?
33. The author believes that the extension of London’s Ulez will
34. Who does the author think should have addressed the problem?
35. It can be learned from the last paragraph that auto companies
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。
全文翻译
去年11月，马德里因对污染最严重的汽车推出雄心勃勃的限制措施而被誉为公共卫生的灯塔。七个月和一次选举日后，新的保守派市议会暂停了清洁空气区的执法，这是可能终结它的第一步。市长何塞·路易斯·马丁内斯-阿尔梅达将反对该区域作为竞选的核心议题，尽管它在改善空气质量方面取得了成功。一位法官现已推翻了该市停止罚款的决定，命令恢复罚款。但随着法律斗争在前方，该区域的未来充其量看起来不确定。
马德里在清洁空气问题上的反复，尖锐地提醒了城市逐个应对这种拼凑方法的局限性，这种方法正是欧洲各地（英国尤甚）应对空气污染的特点。
在其他弱点中，当城市被留下来独自应对空气污染时，它们必须采取的措施在政治上具有争议性，因此很脆弱。这是因为它们不可避免地将清洁空气的成本放在了个人驾驶者身上——他们必须支付费用或购买更好的车辆——而不是放在汽车制造商身上，而汽车制造商的欺诈行为才是我们有毒污染的真正原因。不难想象伦敦也会发生类似的逆转。新的超低排放区很可能成为明年市长选举中的重大议题。而如果萨迪克·汗获胜并按计划在2021年将其扩展到南北环路，肯定会引发更多将受影响的驾驶者的强烈反对。
伦敦的超低排放区等措施并非无用。远非如此。地方官员正在使用他们手头可用的杠杆来在面对严重威胁时保护居民的健康。这些区域确实为空气质量带来了一些改善，科学告诉我们这意味着真正的健康益处。
但市长和议员们对于一个远比任何一个城市或城镇都大的问题只能做这么多。他们之所以采取行动，是因为国家政府——英国和欧洲其他国家的政府——未能这样做。
将高污染汽车排除在某些区域之外——市中心、学校街区甚至个别道路——的限制措施，是对缺乏更大力度妥善执行现有法规并要求汽车公司使其车辆合规的回应。威尔士引入了特殊的低速限制以最小化污染。我们什么都做，唯独不坚持要求制造商清洁他们的汽车。
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。
"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）。
"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。
"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。