Questões Militares Comentadas sobre inglês
Foram encontradas 3.288 questões
First study of all Amazon greenhouse gases suggests the
damaged forest is now worsening climate change
The Amazon rainforest is most likely now a net contributor to warming of the planet, according to a first-of-its-kind analysis from more than 30 scientists.
For years, researchers have expressed concern that rising temperatures, drought, and deforestation are reducing the capacity of the world’s largest rainforest to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and help offset emissions from fossil-fuel burning. Recent studies have even suggested that some portions of the tropical landscape already may release more carbon than they store.
But the inhaling and exhaling of CO2 is just one way this damp jungle, the most species-rich on Earth, influences the global climate. Activities in the Amazon, both natural and human-caused, can shift the rainforest’s contribution in significant ways, warming the air directly or releasing other greenhouse gases that do.
Yet no team had ever tried to assess the cumulative impact of these processes, even as the region is being rapidly transformed. The research estimates that atmospheric warming from all of these sources combined now appears to swamp the forest’s natural cooling effect.
The damage, however, can still be reversed. Halting global emissions from coal, oil, and natural gas would help restore balance, but curbing Amazon deforestation is a must, along with reducing dam building and increasing efforts to replant trees. Continuing to clear land at current rates appears certain to make warming worse for the entire world.
Internet:<www.nationalgeographic.com>
Based on the text above, judge the follow item.
In the last sentence of the second paragraph, the pronoun
“they” refers to “some portions of the tropical landscape”.
First study of all Amazon greenhouse gases suggests the
damaged forest is now worsening climate change
The Amazon rainforest is most likely now a net contributor to warming of the planet, according to a first-of-its-kind analysis from more than 30 scientists.
For years, researchers have expressed concern that rising temperatures, drought, and deforestation are reducing the capacity of the world’s largest rainforest to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and help offset emissions from fossil-fuel burning. Recent studies have even suggested that some portions of the tropical landscape already may release more carbon than they store.
But the inhaling and exhaling of CO2 is just one way this damp jungle, the most species-rich on Earth, influences the global climate. Activities in the Amazon, both natural and human-caused, can shift the rainforest’s contribution in significant ways, warming the air directly or releasing other greenhouse gases that do.
Yet no team had ever tried to assess the cumulative impact of these processes, even as the region is being rapidly transformed. The research estimates that atmospheric warming from all of these sources combined now appears to swamp the forest’s natural cooling effect.
The damage, however, can still be reversed. Halting global emissions from coal, oil, and natural gas would help restore balance, but curbing Amazon deforestation is a must, along with reducing dam building and increasing efforts to replant trees. Continuing to clear land at current rates appears certain to make warming worse for the entire world.
Internet:<www.nationalgeographic.com>
Based on the text above, judge the follow item.
According to the third paragraph, the Amazon rainforest has
the largest variety of living species on the planet.
First study of all Amazon greenhouse gases suggests the
damaged forest is now worsening climate change
The Amazon rainforest is most likely now a net contributor to warming of the planet, according to a first-of-its-kind analysis from more than 30 scientists.
For years, researchers have expressed concern that rising temperatures, drought, and deforestation are reducing the capacity of the world’s largest rainforest to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and help offset emissions from fossil-fuel burning. Recent studies have even suggested that some portions of the tropical landscape already may release more carbon than they store.
But the inhaling and exhaling of CO2 is just one way this damp jungle, the most species-rich on Earth, influences the global climate. Activities in the Amazon, both natural and human-caused, can shift the rainforest’s contribution in significant ways, warming the air directly or releasing other greenhouse gases that do.
Yet no team had ever tried to assess the cumulative impact of these processes, even as the region is being rapidly transformed. The research estimates that atmospheric warming from all of these sources combined now appears to swamp the forest’s natural cooling effect.
The damage, however, can still be reversed. Halting global emissions from coal, oil, and natural gas would help restore balance, but curbing Amazon deforestation is a must, along with reducing dam building and increasing efforts to replant trees. Continuing to clear land at current rates appears certain to make warming worse for the entire world.
Internet:<www.nationalgeographic.com>
Based on the text above, judge the follow item.
The term “the tropical landscape” (second paragraph) refers
to the Amazon rainforest.
First study of all Amazon greenhouse gases suggests the
damaged forest is now worsening climate change
The Amazon rainforest is most likely now a net contributor to warming of the planet, according to a first-of-its-kind analysis from more than 30 scientists.
For years, researchers have expressed concern that rising temperatures, drought, and deforestation are reducing the capacity of the world’s largest rainforest to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and help offset emissions from fossil-fuel burning. Recent studies have even suggested that some portions of the tropical landscape already may release more carbon than they store.
But the inhaling and exhaling of CO2 is just one way this damp jungle, the most species-rich on Earth, influences the global climate. Activities in the Amazon, both natural and human-caused, can shift the rainforest’s contribution in significant ways, warming the air directly or releasing other greenhouse gases that do.
Yet no team had ever tried to assess the cumulative impact of these processes, even as the region is being rapidly transformed. The research estimates that atmospheric warming from all of these sources combined now appears to swamp the forest’s natural cooling effect.
The damage, however, can still be reversed. Halting global emissions from coal, oil, and natural gas would help restore balance, but curbing Amazon deforestation is a must, along with reducing dam building and increasing efforts to replant trees. Continuing to clear land at current rates appears certain to make warming worse for the entire world.
Internet:<www.nationalgeographic.com>
Based on the text above, judge the follow item.
According to the second paragraph, rising temperatures,
drought and deforestation stopped being the cause of global
warming and have been no longer something to worry about.
First study of all Amazon greenhouse gases suggests the
damaged forest is now worsening climate change
The Amazon rainforest is most likely now a net contributor to warming of the planet, according to a first-of-its-kind analysis from more than 30 scientists.
For years, researchers have expressed concern that rising temperatures, drought, and deforestation are reducing the capacity of the world’s largest rainforest to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and help offset emissions from fossil-fuel burning. Recent studies have even suggested that some portions of the tropical landscape already may release more carbon than they store.
But the inhaling and exhaling of CO2 is just one way this damp jungle, the most species-rich on Earth, influences the global climate. Activities in the Amazon, both natural and human-caused, can shift the rainforest’s contribution in significant ways, warming the air directly or releasing other greenhouse gases that do.
Yet no team had ever tried to assess the cumulative impact of these processes, even as the region is being rapidly transformed. The research estimates that atmospheric warming from all of these sources combined now appears to swamp the forest’s natural cooling effect.
The damage, however, can still be reversed. Halting global emissions from coal, oil, and natural gas would help restore balance, but curbing Amazon deforestation is a must, along with reducing dam building and increasing efforts to replant trees. Continuing to clear land at current rates appears certain to make warming worse for the entire world.
Internet:<www.nationalgeographic.com>
Based on the text above, judge the follow item.
It is the first time an analysis showing that the Amazon
rainforest is also contributing to global warming has been
made.
How rich countries cause deforestation in poor ones
Forests are crucial to the functioning of the Earth. They provide homes for plants and animals, absorb rainfall, produce oxygen and suck up carbon dioxide, helping to keep global temperatures in check. Environmentalists are increasingly worried about their loss. Ten thousand years ago, more than half of the world’s habitable land was covered in trees; since then one third have been cut down to make way for agriculture and an ever-growing number of humans. Efforts to reverse this trend, including tree-planting programmes in America, Europe, China and India, among other places, have helped replenish some of what is left of the world’s forests.
But such gains do not tell the whole story. For all their tree-planting efforts at home, rich countries continue to contribute, through their consumption, to the levelling of vast tracts of forests in poor countries. A study, published on March 29th in Nature Ecology & Evolution, reveals the extent and location of the world’s “deforestation footprint”. Keiichiro Kanemoto and Nguyen Tien Hoang, of the Research Institute for Humanity and Nature in Japan, combined data on global forest loss with that on international trade between 2001 and 2015. They calculated that rich-country demand for goods led overwhelmingly to deforestation outside their own borders, and mostly in tropical countries. In G7 countries, for example, the area covered by forests increased every year between 2001 and 2015. But after adjusting for trade, the authors found that these countries contributed to a net loss of 20,000 square kilometers of forest in the rest of the world in 2015 alone.
Internet: <www.economist.com> (adapted).
Based on the text above, judge the following item.
In G7 countries, the tree-covered areas gradually decreased
in a period of 14 years.
How rich countries cause deforestation in poor ones
Forests are crucial to the functioning of the Earth. They provide homes for plants and animals, absorb rainfall, produce oxygen and suck up carbon dioxide, helping to keep global temperatures in check. Environmentalists are increasingly worried about their loss. Ten thousand years ago, more than half of the world’s habitable land was covered in trees; since then one third have been cut down to make way for agriculture and an ever-growing number of humans. Efforts to reverse this trend, including tree-planting programmes in America, Europe, China and India, among other places, have helped replenish some of what is left of the world’s forests.
But such gains do not tell the whole story. For all their tree-planting efforts at home, rich countries continue to contribute, through their consumption, to the levelling of vast tracts of forests in poor countries. A study, published on March 29th in Nature Ecology & Evolution, reveals the extent and location of the world’s “deforestation footprint”. Keiichiro Kanemoto and Nguyen Tien Hoang, of the Research Institute for Humanity and Nature in Japan, combined data on global forest loss with that on international trade between 2001 and 2015. They calculated that rich-country demand for goods led overwhelmingly to deforestation outside their own borders, and mostly in tropical countries. In G7 countries, for example, the area covered by forests increased every year between 2001 and 2015. But after adjusting for trade, the authors found that these countries contributed to a net loss of 20,000 square kilometers of forest in the rest of the world in 2015 alone.
Internet: <www.economist.com> (adapted).
Based on the text above, judge the following item.
For the last 10.000 years, at least one third of the trees which
covered the world have been cut down so that men could
grow their food, among other activities.
How rich countries cause deforestation in poor ones
Forests are crucial to the functioning of the Earth. They provide homes for plants and animals, absorb rainfall, produce oxygen and suck up carbon dioxide, helping to keep global temperatures in check. Environmentalists are increasingly worried about their loss. Ten thousand years ago, more than half of the world’s habitable land was covered in trees; since then one third have been cut down to make way for agriculture and an ever-growing number of humans. Efforts to reverse this trend, including tree-planting programmes in America, Europe, China and India, among other places, have helped replenish some of what is left of the world’s forests.
But such gains do not tell the whole story. For all their tree-planting efforts at home, rich countries continue to contribute, through their consumption, to the levelling of vast tracts of forests in poor countries. A study, published on March 29th in Nature Ecology & Evolution, reveals the extent and location of the world’s “deforestation footprint”. Keiichiro Kanemoto and Nguyen Tien Hoang, of the Research Institute for Humanity and Nature in Japan, combined data on global forest loss with that on international trade between 2001 and 2015. They calculated that rich-country demand for goods led overwhelmingly to deforestation outside their own borders, and mostly in tropical countries. In G7 countries, for example, the area covered by forests increased every year between 2001 and 2015. But after adjusting for trade, the authors found that these countries contributed to a net loss of 20,000 square kilometers of forest in the rest of the world in 2015 alone.
Internet: <www.economist.com> (adapted).
Based on the text above, judge the following item.
The text claims that over 50% of the world’s habitable land
was covered in trees ten millennia ago.
How rich countries cause deforestation in poor ones
Forests are crucial to the functioning of the Earth. They provide homes for plants and animals, absorb rainfall, produce oxygen and suck up carbon dioxide, helping to keep global temperatures in check. Environmentalists are increasingly worried about their loss. Ten thousand years ago, more than half of the world’s habitable land was covered in trees; since then one third have been cut down to make way for agriculture and an ever-growing number of humans. Efforts to reverse this trend, including tree-planting programmes in America, Europe, China and India, among other places, have helped replenish some of what is left of the world’s forests.
But such gains do not tell the whole story. For all their tree-planting efforts at home, rich countries continue to contribute, through their consumption, to the levelling of vast tracts of forests in poor countries. A study, published on March 29th in Nature Ecology & Evolution, reveals the extent and location of the world’s “deforestation footprint”. Keiichiro Kanemoto and Nguyen Tien Hoang, of the Research Institute for Humanity and Nature in Japan, combined data on global forest loss with that on international trade between 2001 and 2015. They calculated that rich-country demand for goods led overwhelmingly to deforestation outside their own borders, and mostly in tropical countries. In G7 countries, for example, the area covered by forests increased every year between 2001 and 2015. But after adjusting for trade, the authors found that these countries contributed to a net loss of 20,000 square kilometers of forest in the rest of the world in 2015 alone.
Internet: <www.economist.com> (adapted).
Based on the text above, judge the following item.
Two reasons why forests are crucial to the functioning of the
Earth are the production of carbon dioxide and the
absorption of rainfall.
IMO Action Plan to address marine plastic
litter from ships
IMO?s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) in 2018 adopted the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) Action Plan to address marine plastic litter from ships, which aims to enhance existing regulations and introduce new supporting measures to reduce marine plastic litter from ships.
What is marine litter?
Plastic materials in all shapes and sizes are omnipresent in our seas and oceans. They break down extremely slowly in the marine environment, taking in excess of 400 years. Marine litter originates from many sources and causes a wide spectrum of environmental, economic, safety, health and cultural impacts. For example, marine litter can cause harm to sea life if ingested or even death if a marine mammal becomes entangled in litter.
Marine litter has been defined by UN Environment (United Nations Environment) as “any persistent, manufactured or processed solid material discarded, disposed of or abandoned in the marine and coastal environment. Marine litter consists of items that have been made or used by people and deliberately discarded into the sea or rivers or on beaches; brought indirectly to the sea with rivers, sewage, storm water or winds; accidentally lost, including material lost at sea in bad weather (fishing gear, cargo); or deliberately left by people on beaches and shores.”
Marine litter, including plastics and microplastics, is known to result from land-based sources in massive quantities but can also originate from ships. Debris particles have been observed in coastal areas, in waters far from anthropogenic pollution sources, in surface waters, in the water column of deep water and in ocean sediments, and from the equator to the poles, including trapped in sea ice.
UN Environment estimates that 15% of marine litter floats on the sea's surface, 15% remains in the water column and 70% rests on the seabed.
According to another study, 5.25 million plastic particles, weighing 268,940 tonnes in total, are currently floating in the world”s oceans.
What problems does marinelitter cause?
In addition to the environmental and health problems posed by marine litter, floating garbage and plastics pose a costly as well as dangerous problem for shipping, as they can be anavigational hazard and become entangled in propellers and rudders.
Another problem requiring urgent remedial action is the massive accumulation of plastics, not only in coastal areas but also in the deep sea.
This litter is harmful to marine life: sea
creatures can become trapped inside containers or
strangled by nets or ropes, and microplastics can
also enter the food chain as they are indigestible
when swallowed.
(Adapted from https://www.imo.org
IMO Action Plan to address marine plastic
litter from ships
IMO?s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) in 2018 adopted the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) Action Plan to address marine plastic litter from ships, which aims to enhance existing regulations and introduce new supporting measures to reduce marine plastic litter from ships.
What is marine litter?
Plastic materials in all shapes and sizes are omnipresent in our seas and oceans. They break down extremely slowly in the marine environment, taking in excess of 400 years. Marine litter originates from many sources and causes a wide spectrum of environmental, economic, safety, health and cultural impacts. For example, marine litter can cause harm to sea life if ingested or even death if a marine mammal becomes entangled in litter.
Marine litter has been defined by UN Environment (United Nations Environment) as “any persistent, manufactured or processed solid material discarded, disposed of or abandoned in the marine and coastal environment. Marine litter consists of items that have been made or used by people and deliberately discarded into the sea or rivers or on beaches; brought indirectly to the sea with rivers, sewage, storm water or winds; accidentally lost, including material lost at sea in bad weather (fishing gear, cargo); or deliberately left by people on beaches and shores.”
Marine litter, including plastics and microplastics, is known to result from land-based sources in massive quantities but can also originate from ships. Debris particles have been observed in coastal areas, in waters far from anthropogenic pollution sources, in surface waters, in the water column of deep water and in ocean sediments, and from the equator to the poles, including trapped in sea ice.
UN Environment estimates that 15% of marine litter floats on the sea's surface, 15% remains in the water column and 70% rests on the seabed.
According to another study, 5.25 million plastic particles, weighing 268,940 tonnes in total, are currently floating in the world”s oceans.
What problems does marinelitter cause?
In addition to the environmental and health problems posed by marine litter, floating garbage and plastics pose a costly as well as dangerous problem for shipping, as they can be anavigational hazard and become entangled in propellers and rudders.
Another problem requiring urgent remedial action is the massive accumulation of plastics, not only in coastal areas but also in the deep sea.
This litter is harmful to marine life: sea
creatures can become trapped inside containers or
strangled by nets or ropes, and microplastics can
also enter the food chain as they are indigestible
when swallowed.
(Adapted from https://www.imo.org
IMO Action Plan to address marine plastic
litter from ships
IMO?s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) in 2018 adopted the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) Action Plan to address marine plastic litter from ships, which aims to enhance existing regulations and introduce new supporting measures to reduce marine plastic litter from ships.
What is marine litter?
Plastic materials in all shapes and sizes are omnipresent in our seas and oceans. They break down extremely slowly in the marine environment, taking in excess of 400 years. Marine litter originates from many sources and causes a wide spectrum of environmental, economic, safety, health and cultural impacts. For example, marine litter can cause harm to sea life if ingested or even death if a marine mammal becomes entangled in litter.
Marine litter has been defined by UN Environment (United Nations Environment) as “any persistent, manufactured or processed solid material discarded, disposed of or abandoned in the marine and coastal environment. Marine litter consists of items that have been made or used by people and deliberately discarded into the sea or rivers or on beaches; brought indirectly to the sea with rivers, sewage, storm water or winds; accidentally lost, including material lost at sea in bad weather (fishing gear, cargo); or deliberately left by people on beaches and shores.”
Marine litter, including plastics and microplastics, is known to result from land-based sources in massive quantities but can also originate from ships. Debris particles have been observed in coastal areas, in waters far from anthropogenic pollution sources, in surface waters, in the water column of deep water and in ocean sediments, and from the equator to the poles, including trapped in sea ice.
UN Environment estimates that 15% of marine litter floats on the sea's surface, 15% remains in the water column and 70% rests on the seabed.
According to another study, 5.25 million plastic particles, weighing 268,940 tonnes in total, are currently floating in the world”s oceans.
What problems does marinelitter cause?
In addition to the environmental and health problems posed by marine litter, floating garbage and plastics pose a costly as well as dangerous problem for shipping, as they can be anavigational hazard and become entangled in propellers and rudders.
Another problem requiring urgent remedial action is the massive accumulation of plastics, not only in coastal areas but also in the deep sea.
This litter is harmful to marine life: sea
creatures can become trapped inside containers or
strangled by nets or ropes, and microplastics can
also enter the food chain as they are indigestible
when swallowed.
(Adapted from https://www.imo.org
Mark the correct option to complete the statements below.
I - Brazilian people ______ responsible for litter discarded.
II - Shipping debris ________too.
III - Cattle _______ as important as marine species.
IV -The police __________ investigating crime against the environment.
V - New statistics on marine litter decrease ______ not reliable.
IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) in 2018 adopted the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) Action Plan to address marine plastic litter from ships, which aims to enhance existing regulations and introduce new supporting measures to reduce marine plastic litter from ships. What is marine litter? Plastic materials in all shapes and sizes are omnipresent in our seas and oceans. They break down extremely slowly in the marine environment, taking in excess of 400 years. Marine litter originates from many sources and causes a wide spectrum of environmental, economic, safety, health and cultural impacts. For example, marine litter can cause harm to sea life if ingested or even death if a marine mammal becomes entangled in litter. Marine litter has been defined by UN Environment (United Nations Environment) as “any persistent, manufactured or processed solid material discarded, disposed of or abandoned in the marine and coastal environment. Marine litter consists of items that have been made or used by people and deliberately discarded into the sea or rivers or on beaches; brought indirectly to the sea with rivers, sewage, storm water or winds; accidentally lost, including material lost at sea in bad weather (fishing gear, cargo); or deliberately left by people on beaches and shores.” Marine litter, including plastics and microplastics, is known to result from land-based sources in massive quantities but can also originate from ships. Debris particles have been observed in coastal areas, in waters far from anthropogenic pollution sources, in surface waters, in the water column of deep water and in ocean sediments, and from the equator to the poles, including trapped in sea ice.
UN Environment estimates that 15% of marine litter floats on the sea's surface, 15% remains in the water column and 70% rests on the seabed. According to another study, 5.25 million plastic particles, weighing 268,940 tonnes in total, are currently floating in the world”s oceans. What problems does marinelitter cause? In addition to the environmental and health problems posed by marine litter, floating garbage and plastics pose a costly as well as dangerous problem for shipping, as they can be anavigational hazard and become entangled in propellers and rudders. Another problem requiring urgent remedial action is the massive accumulation of plastics, not only in coastal areas but also in the deep sea. This litter is harmful to marine life: sea creatures can become trapped inside containers or strangled by nets or ropes, and microplastics can also enter the food chain as they are indigestible when swallowed. (Adapted from https://www.imo.org)
Mark the correct alternative about the text above.
Achemical-laden cargo ship is sinking off the coast of Sri Lanka, sparkling fears of an environmental disaster
The Singapore-registered X-Press Pearl I- ________ on fire for almost two weeks before the blaze II- _________ this week. Hundreds of tonnes of oil from fuel tanks III- _________ into the sea, IV- ____________nearby marine life. The Sri Lankan and Indian navies V- _________jointly over the past days in an attempt VI- ________ the fire and VI- _________ the ship from breaking and sinking.
(Adapted from https://www.bbc.com>news>word...)
Conheça nossos planos