In spite of the strong opposition to new and stricter environmental laws, however, it is still possible to attack the problem of chemical pollution; but we must attack it from three directions. First, we need more independent research into the effects of chemicals by scientists who are not paid by the government or by large industrial companies. Second, scientists need to educate the general public and inform them about the dangers of chemicals in the environment. 

If the public knows that a certain chemical threatens the health of their children, then it will put pressure on politicians in local and national governments. If the politicians want to remain in office, they will take action to correct the situation. Third, economists need to educate governments about the long-term economic costs of chemicals. It will be extremely expensive to clean areas of land which are contaminated(污染)by chemicals; it will be even more costly to give medical treatment to people who are suffering from serious illnesses after exposure to dangerous chemicals. If governments realize this, the short-term economic benefits of chemicals will seem much less attractive to them.

If we can put pressure on governments in these three ways, perhaps they will begin to behave more responsibly. They will perhaps pass new laws against pollution and enforce them strictly. Perhaps, then, the chemical producers will begin to behave more responsibly.

 Which of the following might be the best title for the passage?  D  

A) The Environment in Danger.          B) The Problem of Chemical Pollution.

C) New and Strict Environmental Laws.    D) Possible Solutions to Chemical Pollution.

Which of the following statements best describes the organization of the passage?   

   C  

A) Two contrasting views of a problem are presented.

B) A procedure is explained and its importance is emphasized.

C) A general statement is given and possible ways are presented.

D) Recent scientific advancements are outlined in order of importance.

 Which of the following is true of the governments mentioned in the passage?  C  

A) They are already behaving in an extremely responsible way.

B) They do not believe that it is possible to solve the chemical pollution.

C) They think chemicals do little harm to the health of humans.

D) They are unwilling to stop the use of certain chemicals.

 Which of the following can be inferred from the passage?   B  

 A) The economy is more important to governments than the people’s health is.

 B) Governments think chemicals bring them more economic benefits than economic costs.

 C) The public knows enough about the dangers of chemical pollution.

 D) The governments fully realize the long-term economic costs of chemical pollution.

 According to the passage, what will happen if the governments stop the use of some chemicals?  A  

 A) The economy of the countries will suffer.              

 B) Unemployment in the countries will grow.

 C) Some people and scientists will criticize them.       

 D) The chemical producers will strongly protest.