Foram encontradas 632 questões

Resolva questões gratuitamente!

Junte-se a mais de 4 milhões de concurseiros!

Ano: 2021 Banca: UECE-CEV Órgão: UECE Prova: UECE-CEV - 2021 - UECE - Prova de Conhecimentos Gerais |
Q1802348 Inglês

T E X T

Britain, Norway and the United States join forces with businesses to protect tropical forests.


    Britain, Norway and the United States said Thursday they would join forces with some of the world’s biggest companies in an effort to rally more than $1 billion for countries that can show they are lowering emissions by protecting tropical forests. The goal is to make intact forests more economically valuable than they would be if the land were cleared for timber and agriculture.


    The initiative comes as the world loses acre after acre of forests to feed global demand for soy, palm oil, timber and cattle. Those forests, from Brazil to Indonesia, are essential to limiting the linked crises of climate change and a global biodiversity collapse. They are also home to Indigenous and other forest communities. Amazon, Nestlé, Unilever, GlaxoSmithKline and Salesforce are among the companies promising money for the new initiative, known as the LEAF Coalition.


    Last year, despite the global downturn triggered by the pandemic, tropical deforestation was up 12 percent from 2019, collectively wiping out an area about the size of Switzerland. That destruction released about twice as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as cars in the United States emit annually.


    “The LEAF Coalition is a groundbreaking example of the scale and type of collaboration that is needed to fight the climate crisis and achieve net-zero emissions globally by 2050,” John Kerry, President Biden’s senior climate envoy, said in a statement. “Bringing together government and privatesector resources is a necessary step in supporting the large-scale efforts that must be mobilized to halt deforestation and begin to restore tropical and subtropical forests.” 

    An existing global effort called REDD+ has struggled to attract sufficient investment and gotten mired in bureaucratic slowdowns. This initiative builds on it, bringing private capital to the table at the country or state level. Until now, companies have invested in forests more informally, sometimes supporting questionable projects that prompted accusations of corruption and “greenwashing,” when a company or brand portrays itself as an environmental steward but its true actions don’t support the claim.


    The new initiative will use satellite imagery to verify results across wide areas to guard against those problems. Monitoring entire jurisdictions would, in theory, prevent governments from saving forestland in one place only to let it be cut down elsewhere.


    Under the plan, countries, states or provinces with tropical forests would commit to reducing deforestation and degradation. Each year or two, they would submit their results, calculating the number of tons of carbon dioxide reduced by their efforts. An independent monitor would verify their claims using satellite images and other measures. Companies and governments would contribute to a pool of money that would pay the national or regional government at least $10 per ton of reduced carbon dioxide.


    Companies will not be allowed to participate unless they have a scientifically sound plan to reach net zero emissions, according to Nigel Purvis, the chief executive of Climate Advisers, a group affiliated with the initiative. “Their number one obligation to the world from a climate standpoint is to reduce their own emissions across their supply chains, across their products, everything,” Mr. Purvis said. He also emphasized that the coalition’s plans would respect the rights of Indigenous and forest communities.


From: www.nytimes.com/April 22, 2021

Statistics related to deforestation in tropical forests show that in 2020 it
Alternativas
Ano: 2021 Banca: UECE-CEV Órgão: UECE Prova: UECE-CEV - 2021 - UECE - Prova de Conhecimentos Gerais |
Q1802347 Inglês

T E X T

Britain, Norway and the United States join forces with businesses to protect tropical forests.


    Britain, Norway and the United States said Thursday they would join forces with some of the world’s biggest companies in an effort to rally more than $1 billion for countries that can show they are lowering emissions by protecting tropical forests. The goal is to make intact forests more economically valuable than they would be if the land were cleared for timber and agriculture.


    The initiative comes as the world loses acre after acre of forests to feed global demand for soy, palm oil, timber and cattle. Those forests, from Brazil to Indonesia, are essential to limiting the linked crises of climate change and a global biodiversity collapse. They are also home to Indigenous and other forest communities. Amazon, Nestlé, Unilever, GlaxoSmithKline and Salesforce are among the companies promising money for the new initiative, known as the LEAF Coalition.


    Last year, despite the global downturn triggered by the pandemic, tropical deforestation was up 12 percent from 2019, collectively wiping out an area about the size of Switzerland. That destruction released about twice as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as cars in the United States emit annually.


    “The LEAF Coalition is a groundbreaking example of the scale and type of collaboration that is needed to fight the climate crisis and achieve net-zero emissions globally by 2050,” John Kerry, President Biden’s senior climate envoy, said in a statement. “Bringing together government and privatesector resources is a necessary step in supporting the large-scale efforts that must be mobilized to halt deforestation and begin to restore tropical and subtropical forests.” 

    An existing global effort called REDD+ has struggled to attract sufficient investment and gotten mired in bureaucratic slowdowns. This initiative builds on it, bringing private capital to the table at the country or state level. Until now, companies have invested in forests more informally, sometimes supporting questionable projects that prompted accusations of corruption and “greenwashing,” when a company or brand portrays itself as an environmental steward but its true actions don’t support the claim.


    The new initiative will use satellite imagery to verify results across wide areas to guard against those problems. Monitoring entire jurisdictions would, in theory, prevent governments from saving forestland in one place only to let it be cut down elsewhere.


    Under the plan, countries, states or provinces with tropical forests would commit to reducing deforestation and degradation. Each year or two, they would submit their results, calculating the number of tons of carbon dioxide reduced by their efforts. An independent monitor would verify their claims using satellite images and other measures. Companies and governments would contribute to a pool of money that would pay the national or regional government at least $10 per ton of reduced carbon dioxide.


    Companies will not be allowed to participate unless they have a scientifically sound plan to reach net zero emissions, according to Nigel Purvis, the chief executive of Climate Advisers, a group affiliated with the initiative. “Their number one obligation to the world from a climate standpoint is to reduce their own emissions across their supply chains, across their products, everything,” Mr. Purvis said. He also emphasized that the coalition’s plans would respect the rights of Indigenous and forest communities.


From: www.nytimes.com/April 22, 2021

According to John Kerry, the LEAF coalition constitutes an essential endeavor towards the
Alternativas
Ano: 2021 Banca: UECE-CEV Órgão: UECE Prova: UECE-CEV - 2021 - UECE - Prova de Conhecimentos Gerais |
Q1802346 Inglês

T E X T

Britain, Norway and the United States join forces with businesses to protect tropical forests.


    Britain, Norway and the United States said Thursday they would join forces with some of the world’s biggest companies in an effort to rally more than $1 billion for countries that can show they are lowering emissions by protecting tropical forests. The goal is to make intact forests more economically valuable than they would be if the land were cleared for timber and agriculture.


    The initiative comes as the world loses acre after acre of forests to feed global demand for soy, palm oil, timber and cattle. Those forests, from Brazil to Indonesia, are essential to limiting the linked crises of climate change and a global biodiversity collapse. They are also home to Indigenous and other forest communities. Amazon, Nestlé, Unilever, GlaxoSmithKline and Salesforce are among the companies promising money for the new initiative, known as the LEAF Coalition.


    Last year, despite the global downturn triggered by the pandemic, tropical deforestation was up 12 percent from 2019, collectively wiping out an area about the size of Switzerland. That destruction released about twice as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as cars in the United States emit annually.


    “The LEAF Coalition is a groundbreaking example of the scale and type of collaboration that is needed to fight the climate crisis and achieve net-zero emissions globally by 2050,” John Kerry, President Biden’s senior climate envoy, said in a statement. “Bringing together government and privatesector resources is a necessary step in supporting the large-scale efforts that must be mobilized to halt deforestation and begin to restore tropical and subtropical forests.” 

    An existing global effort called REDD+ has struggled to attract sufficient investment and gotten mired in bureaucratic slowdowns. This initiative builds on it, bringing private capital to the table at the country or state level. Until now, companies have invested in forests more informally, sometimes supporting questionable projects that prompted accusations of corruption and “greenwashing,” when a company or brand portrays itself as an environmental steward but its true actions don’t support the claim.


    The new initiative will use satellite imagery to verify results across wide areas to guard against those problems. Monitoring entire jurisdictions would, in theory, prevent governments from saving forestland in one place only to let it be cut down elsewhere.


    Under the plan, countries, states or provinces with tropical forests would commit to reducing deforestation and degradation. Each year or two, they would submit their results, calculating the number of tons of carbon dioxide reduced by their efforts. An independent monitor would verify their claims using satellite images and other measures. Companies and governments would contribute to a pool of money that would pay the national or regional government at least $10 per ton of reduced carbon dioxide.


    Companies will not be allowed to participate unless they have a scientifically sound plan to reach net zero emissions, according to Nigel Purvis, the chief executive of Climate Advisers, a group affiliated with the initiative. “Their number one obligation to the world from a climate standpoint is to reduce their own emissions across their supply chains, across their products, everything,” Mr. Purvis said. He also emphasized that the coalition’s plans would respect the rights of Indigenous and forest communities.


From: www.nytimes.com/April 22, 2021

The initiative effort of countries and companies to protect tropical forests is in line with the attempt to
Alternativas
Ano: 2021 Banca: UECE-CEV Órgão: UECE Prova: UECE-CEV - 2021 - UECE - Prova de Conhecimentos Gerais |
Q1802345 Inglês

T E X T

Britain, Norway and the United States join forces with businesses to protect tropical forests.


    Britain, Norway and the United States said Thursday they would join forces with some of the world’s biggest companies in an effort to rally more than $1 billion for countries that can show they are lowering emissions by protecting tropical forests. The goal is to make intact forests more economically valuable than they would be if the land were cleared for timber and agriculture.


    The initiative comes as the world loses acre after acre of forests to feed global demand for soy, palm oil, timber and cattle. Those forests, from Brazil to Indonesia, are essential to limiting the linked crises of climate change and a global biodiversity collapse. They are also home to Indigenous and other forest communities. Amazon, Nestlé, Unilever, GlaxoSmithKline and Salesforce are among the companies promising money for the new initiative, known as the LEAF Coalition.


    Last year, despite the global downturn triggered by the pandemic, tropical deforestation was up 12 percent from 2019, collectively wiping out an area about the size of Switzerland. That destruction released about twice as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as cars in the United States emit annually.


    “The LEAF Coalition is a groundbreaking example of the scale and type of collaboration that is needed to fight the climate crisis and achieve net-zero emissions globally by 2050,” John Kerry, President Biden’s senior climate envoy, said in a statement. “Bringing together government and privatesector resources is a necessary step in supporting the large-scale efforts that must be mobilized to halt deforestation and begin to restore tropical and subtropical forests.” 

    An existing global effort called REDD+ has struggled to attract sufficient investment and gotten mired in bureaucratic slowdowns. This initiative builds on it, bringing private capital to the table at the country or state level. Until now, companies have invested in forests more informally, sometimes supporting questionable projects that prompted accusations of corruption and “greenwashing,” when a company or brand portrays itself as an environmental steward but its true actions don’t support the claim.


    The new initiative will use satellite imagery to verify results across wide areas to guard against those problems. Monitoring entire jurisdictions would, in theory, prevent governments from saving forestland in one place only to let it be cut down elsewhere.


    Under the plan, countries, states or provinces with tropical forests would commit to reducing deforestation and degradation. Each year or two, they would submit their results, calculating the number of tons of carbon dioxide reduced by their efforts. An independent monitor would verify their claims using satellite images and other measures. Companies and governments would contribute to a pool of money that would pay the national or regional government at least $10 per ton of reduced carbon dioxide.


    Companies will not be allowed to participate unless they have a scientifically sound plan to reach net zero emissions, according to Nigel Purvis, the chief executive of Climate Advisers, a group affiliated with the initiative. “Their number one obligation to the world from a climate standpoint is to reduce their own emissions across their supply chains, across their products, everything,” Mr. Purvis said. He also emphasized that the coalition’s plans would respect the rights of Indigenous and forest communities.


From: www.nytimes.com/April 22, 2021

According to the text, tropical forests are being cut down, among other reasons, for
Alternativas
Q2030423 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
The superlative forms of the adjectives accurate, large, and easy are, respectively,
Alternativas
Q2030422 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
The phrase “The research, published in Science Advances…” (lines 10-11) can be correctly rewritten as
Alternativas
Q2030421 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
“There are no data standards” (lines 73-74) can be correctly rewritten as
Alternativas
Q2030420 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
In the phrases “Of the total exported” (line 23) and “in countries considered” (line 24), the two verbs are in the
Alternativas
Q2030419 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
“They settled on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent” (lines 66-67) is a/an
Alternativas
Q2030418 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
“At a minimum” (line 41) and “in the team's previous study” (lines 41-43) are examples of
Alternativas
Q2030417 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
“…while the earlier one did not” (lines 17-18) is a/an
Alternativas
Q2030416 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
The verbs in “...ends up in countries considered to have inadequate waste management” (lines 24-25) are, respectively,
Alternativas
Q2030415 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
In the sentence “Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped overseas, he said, data is often not recorded at all” (lines 75-77), the underlined verbs are, respectively,
Alternativas
Q2030414 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
In the sentence “They've put their best estimate, as accurate as they could be with this data, he said, and used ranges, which underscores that...” (lines 83-86), the underlined verbs are, respectively,
Alternativas
Q2030413 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
The words “recycling” (line 3), “littering” (line 40), and “being” (line 55) are respectively used as
Alternativas
Q2030412 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
In “Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who was not involved in the study, said it could offer a more accurate accounting of plastic pollution...” (lines 78- 81), there is an example of
Alternativas
Q2030411 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
The sentence “The United States, which does not have sufficient infrastructure to handle its recycling demands at home, exports about half of its recyclable waste.” (lines 19-22) contains a/an 
Alternativas
Q2030410 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
The sentence “The study estimates that in 2016, the United States contributed between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of plastic waste to the oceans…” (lines 36-39) contains a/an
Alternativas
Q2030409 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
Considering the information provided in the text, it is clear that of the total plastic waste in the United States
Alternativas
Q2030408 Inglês
Americans May Add Five Times More Plastic to the Oceans Than Thought

The United States is using more
plastic than ever, and waste exported for
recycling is often mishandled, according
to a new study.
The United States contribution
to coastal plastic pollution worldwide is
significantly larger than previously
thought, possibly by as much as five
times, according to a study published
Friday. The research, published in Science
Advances, is the sequel to a 2015 paper
by the same authors. Two factors
contributed to the sharp increase:
Americans are using more plastic than
ever and the current study included
pollution generated by United States
exports of plastic waste, while the earlier
one did not.
The United States, which does
not have sufficient infrastructure to
handle its recycling demands at home,
exports about half of its recyclable waste.
Of the total exported, about 88 percent
ends up in countries considered to have
inadequate waste management.
“When you consider how much
of our plastic waste isn’t actually
recyclable because it is low-value,
contaminated or difficult to process, it’s
not surprising that a lot of it ends up
polluting the environment,” said the
study’s lead author, Kara Lavender Law,
research professor of oceanography at
Sea Education Association, in a
statement.
The study estimates that in
2016, the United States contributed
between 1.1 and 2.2 million metric tons of
plastic waste to the oceans through a
combination of littering, dumping and 
mismanaged exports. At a minimum,
that’s almost double the total estimated
waste in the team’s previous study. At the
high end, it would be a fivefold increase
over the earlier estimate.
Nicholas Mallos, a senior
director at the Ocean Conservancy and an
author of the study, said the upper
estimate would be equal to a pile of
plastic covering the area of the White
House Lawn and reaching as high as the
Empire State Building.
The ranges are wide partly
because “there’s no real standard for
being able to provide good quality data on
collection and disposal of waste in
general,” said Ted Siegler, a resource
economist at DSM Environmental
Solutions, a consulting firm, and an
author of the study. Mr. Siegler said the
researchers had evaluated waste-disposal
practices in countries around the world
and used their “best professional
judgment” to determine the lowest and
highest amounts of plastic waste likely to
escape into the environment. They settled
on a range of 25 percent to 75 percent.
Tony Walker, an associate
professor at the Dalhousie University
School for Resource and Environmental
Studies in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that
analyzing waste data can amount to a
“data minefield” because there are no
data standards across municipalities.
Moreover, once plastic waste is shipped
overseas, he said, data is often not
recorded at all.
Nonetheless, Dr. Walker, who
was not involved in the study, said it
could offer a more accurate accounting of
plastic pollution than the previous study,
which likely underestimated the United
States’ contribution. “They’ve put their
best estimate, as accurate as they can be
with this data,” he said, and used ranges,
which underscores that the figures are
estimates.
Of the plastics that go into the
United States recycling system, about 9
percent of the country’s total plastic
waste, there is no guarantee that they’ll
be remade into new consumer goods. New
plastic is so inexpensive to manufacture
that only certain expensive, high-grade
plastics are profitable to recycle within the
United States, which is why roughly half
of the country’s plastic waste was shipped
abroad in 2016, the most recent year for
which data is available.
Since 2016, however, the
recycling landscape has changed. China
and many countries in Southeast Asia
have stopped accepting plastic waste
imports. And lower oil prices have further
reduced the market for recycled plastic.
“What the new study really underscores is
we have to get a handle on source
reduction at home,” Mr. Mallos said. “That
starts with eliminating unnecessary and
problematic single-use plastics.”

From: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/30/
A high percentage of the USA's exported recyclable waste goes to countries that
Alternativas
Respostas
121: B
122: A
123: D
124: C
125: A
126: C
127: D
128: A
129: B
130: C
131: D
132: A
133: A
134: B
135: D
136: A
137: C
138: D
139: B
140: B