Reading 2026-08 Test 2 — IELTS Academic Reading Practice Test with Answers

基于考生回忆重建 — 非官方 IELTS 资料。音频和原文均为练习用途的重现版本。

Reading Passage 1 — Dirty River but Clean Water

Floods can occur in rivers when the flow rate exceeds the capacity of the river channel, particularly at bends or meanders in the waterway. Floods often cause damage to homes and businesses if they are in the natural flood plains of rivers. While riverine flood damage can be eliminated by moving away from rivers and other bodies of water, people have traditionally lived and worked by rivers because the land is usually flat and fertile and because rivers provide easy travel and access to commerce and industry.

Fire and flood are two of humanity’s worst nightmares. People have, therefore, always sought to control them. Forest fires are snuffed out quickly. The flow of rivers is regulated by weirs and dams. At least, that is how it used to be. But foresters have learned that forests need fires to clear out the brush and even to get seeds to germinate. And a similar revelation is now dawning on hydrologists. Rivers – and the ecosystems they support – need floods. That is why a man-made torrent has been surging down the Grand Canyon. By Thursday, March 6th it was running at full throttle, which was expected to be sustained for 60 hours.

Floods once raged through the canyon every year. Spring Snow from as far away as Wyoming would melt and swell the Colorado river to a flow that averaged around 1,500 cubic metres (50,000 cubic feet) a second. Every eight years or so, that figure rose to almost 3,000 cubic metres. These floods infused the river with sediment, carved its beaches and built its sandbars.

However, in the four decades since the building of the Glen Canyon dam, just upstream of the Grand Canyon, the only sediment that it has collected has come from tiny, undammed tributaries. Even that has not been much use as those tributaries are not powerful enough to distribute the sediment in an ecologically valuable way.

This lack of flooding has harmed local wildlife. The humpback chub, for example, thrived in the rust-red waters of Colorado. Recently, though, its population has crashed. At first sight, it looked as if the reason was that the chub were being eaten by trout introduced for sport fishing in the mid-20th century. But trout and chub co-existed until the Glen Canyon dam was built, so something else is going on. Steve Gloss, of the United States Geological Survey (USGS), reckons that the chub’s decline is the result of their losing their most valuable natural defense, Colorado’s rusty sediment. The chub were well adapted to the poor visibility created by the thick, red water which gave the river its name and depended on it to hide from predators.

Without the cloudy water, the chub became vulnerable.

And the chub are not alone. In the years since the Glen Canyon dam was built, several species have vanished altogether. These include the Colorado pike-minnow, the razorback sucker and the roundtail chub. Meanwhile, aliens including fathead minnows, channel catfish and common carp, which would have been hard, put to survive in the savage waters of the undammed canyon, have moved in.

So flooding is the obvious answer. Unfortunately, it is easier said than done. Floods were sent down the Grand Canyon in 1996 and 2004 and the results were mixed. In 1996 the flood was allowed to go on too long. To start with, all seemed well. The floodwaters built up sandbanks and infused the river with sediment. Eventually, however, the continued flow washed most of the sediment out of the canyon. This problem was avoided in 2004, but unfortunately, on that occasion, the volume of sand available behind the dam was too low to rebuild the sandbanks. This time, the USGS is convinced that things will be better. The amount of sediment available is three times greater than it was in 2004. So if a flood is going to do some good, this is the time to unleash one.

Even so, it may turn out to be an empty gesture. At less than 1,200 cubic metres a second, this flood is smaller than even an average spring flood, let alone one of the mightier deluges of the past. Those glorious inundations moved massive quantities of sediment through the Grand Canyon, wiping the slate dirty, and making a muddy mess of silt and muck that would make modern river rafters cringe.

Questions 1-7: True/False/Not Given

Do the following statements agree with the information given in Reading Passage 1? In boxes 1-7 on your answer sheet, write TRUE if the statement is true, FALSE if the statement is false, NOT GIVEN if the information is not given in the passage.

1
Damage caused by a fire is worse than that caused by the flood.
2
The flood peaks at almost 1500 cubic meters every eight years.
3
Contribution of sediments delivered by tributaries has little impact.
4
The decreasing number of chubs is always caused by introducing of trout since the mid 20th century.
5
It seemed that the artificial flood in 1996 had achieved success partly at the very beginning.
6
In fact, the yield of artificial flood water is smaller than an average natural flood at present.
7
Mighty floods drove fast-moving flows with clean and high-quality water.

Questions 8-13: Summary Completion

Complete the summary below. Choose NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS from the passage for each answer.

The Eco-Impact of the Canyon Dam

Floods are people’s nightmare. In the past, the canyon was raged by flood every year. The snow from far Wyoming would melt in the season of 8 __________ and caused a flood flow peak in Colorado river. In the four decades after people built the Glen Canyon Dam, it only could gather 9 __________ together from tiny, undammed tributaries.

Humpback chub population reduced, why?

Then several species disappeared including Colorado pike-minnow, 10 __________ and the round-tail chub. Meanwhile, some moved in such as fathead minnows, channel catfish and 11 __________. The non-stopped flow led to the washing away of the sediment out of the canyon, which poses a great threat to the chubs because it has poor 12 __________ away from predators. In addition, the volume of 13 __________ available behind the dam was too low to rebuild the bars and flooding became more serious.

Reading Passage 2 — Introduction to a book about the assessment of carbon footprints

A As this book is about ways of measuring the carbon footprint of particular things, I should start by making it clear what I mean. I am using the word 'carbon' as shorthand for all the different global-warming greenhouse gases, and I am using the word 'footprint' as a metaphor for the total impact that something has. So, I am using the phrase 'carbon footprint' as shorthand to mean the full climate-change impact of something. That something could be anything – an activity, an item, a lifestyle, a company, a country, or even the whole world.

B Measuring carbon footprints is a long way from being an exact process, whatever anyone tells you, or whatever numbers you might see written on the side of products in some shops. All my numbers are best estimates and nothing more, even though I have reached them as carefully as I can.

C I have used a variety of different methods, and so I have drawn on a range of data sets and models taken from publicly available reports of life-cycle studies. I have also used studies carried out for businesses across different industries by my own company, Small World Consulting, using models that we are developing all the time. Often, I have arrived at numbers by a couple of different routes to check that the results agree with each other. Occasionally, it has been more a case of putting my finger in the air and guessing, but when that has been the case, I have tried to make it clear.

D The publicly available data sets I have used were arrived at by two main methods. The first of these, process-based life-cycle analysis, is the most common approach to carbon footprint calculations. It is often referred to as 'bottom-up' because you start off identifying, one by one, all the processes that have had to happen in order for, say, a product to be created. Then you add up the emissions from each process, and that is the footprint of the product. It may sound simple, but it is not at all. It is back-breaking work, and since the number of processes you really need to include is always infinite, the job is never quite complete, so you end up with an underestimate. In fact, the omissions from the calculation are often shocking: they can be fifty per cent or more. To make matters worse, these problems are commonly overlooked, even in the development of government-backed and government-funded guidelines, such as the UK's PAS 2050 standard. But for all the problems, process-based life-cycle analysis is still an essential source of detailed information that can't be gathered any other way.

E The other method is environmental input-output analysis. This is a neat alternative to process-based life-cycle analysis. It is not as popular, perhaps because it is a bit less easy to understand, but it is at least as robust as anything else in the dim world of measuring carbon footprints. It is sometimes called a 'top-down' approach because it begins by looking at the whole economy. It uses macroeconomic modelling to understand the way in which the activities of one industry trigger activities and emissions in every other industry. Input-output analysis' key 'trick' is a piece of ingenious maths (for which a man called Wassily Leontief got a Nobel Prize) that succeeds in capturing the endless ripple effects in a way that is one hundred per cent complete. It has the further advantage that if you know how much something costs, you can get an instant crude estimate of its carbon footprint. It is like a magic trick. And just like all the best magic, it is also a bit too good to be true – in many cases, the results can be ridiculously general and of little value.

F Input-output analysis is nevertheless a method of choice, both because it does not miss things, and because once a specific model has been built, it is often easy to use. The basic technique is well established. The specific model I have used is one that was developed at Small World Consulting in collaboration with Lancaster University in the UK, and draws mainly on data obtained from government sources. It was based on a 2007 picture of the UK economy. It deals with all the greenhouse gases, and employs a weighting factor for gases emitted at a high altitude, which have a greater impact than ground-level emissions. A key weakness, which I sometimes adjust for, is that it treats imported products as though they had the same carbon intensity as products from within the UK, whereas in reality imports are usually more carbon intensive.

G Most of the time, I have used a combination of life-cycle analysis and input-output analysis to get my numbers. At its best, life-cycle analysis can be more precise, but input-output analysis is often able to get at information that life-cycle analysis is unable to reach. Putting the two methods together is sometimes called a hybrid approach, and the result is a bit like looking through both a microscope and a telescope at the same time. They each show you different things, and between them, if the lenses are clean, you end up with a passable understanding of whatever it is you are looking at.

life-cycle: the stages of a product's life from beginning to end (i.e. from raw material extraction through materials processing, manufacture, distribution, use, repair and maintenance, and disposal or recycling)

Questions 14–19: Matching Information

The text has seven paragraphs, A–G. Which paragraph contains the following information? NB You may choose any paragraph more than once.

14
reference to an award-winning formula
15
an acknowledgement of the general shortcomings of carbon footprint calculations
16
mention of a working partnership
17
reference to the demanding nature of one way of calculating carbon footprints
18
the advantage of combining two different methods
19
a comparison between goods from home and abroad

Questions 20–21: Multiple Choice (Process-based life-cycle analysis)

Choose TWO correct answers. The list below describes some of the possible features of process-based life-cycle analysis. Which TWO of these features are mentioned by the writer of the passage?

A It is more complicated than it sounds.

B It usually produces exaggerated results.

C It is a frequently used procedure.

D Its faults are widely recognised.

E It was first developed in the UK.

20
Which TWO of these features are mentioned by the writer of the passage?
- A. It is more complicated than it sounds.
- B. It usually produces exaggerated results.
- C. It is a frequently used procedure.
- D. Its faults are widely recognised.
- E. It was first developed in the UK.

Questions 22–23: Multiple Choice (Environmental input-output analysis)

Choose TWO correct answers. The list below describes some of the possible features of environmental input-output analysis. Which TWO of these features are mentioned by the writer of the passage?

A It is often the basis of national guidelines.

B Its starting point is the manufacturing process.

C It is comprehensive in scope.

D It is a relatively new method of calculation.

E It can use prices to get approximate carbon footprints.

22
Which TWO of these features are mentioned by the writer of the passage?
- A. It is often the basis of national guidelines.
- B. Its starting point is the manufacturing process.
- C. It is comprehensive in scope.
- D. It is a relatively new method of calculation.
- E. It can use prices to get approximate carbon footprints.

Questions 24–26: Summary Completion

Complete the summary. Write ONE WORD ONLY from the text for each answer.

Small World Consulting has collaborated with a UK university to develop a version of the environmental input-output model of analysis, using data provided by the 24 __________ about the UK economy in 2007. This model is able to take into account the altitude at which greenhouse gases are released. A significant 25 __________ is that it does not distinguish between 26 __________ of different origin, but the writer occasionally makes allowances for that.

Reading Passage 3 — Rewards for scientific achievement

While the Nobel Prizes are over 115 years old, rewards for scientific achievement have been around much longer. As early as the 17th century, at the very origins of modern experimental science, promoters of science realized the need for some system of recognition and reward that would provide incentive for advances in the field.

Before the prize, it was the gift that dominated in science. Precursors to modern scientists – the early astronomers, philosophers, physicians, alchemists and engineers – offered wonderful discoveries, inventions and works of literature or art as gifts to powerful patrons, often royalty. Many scientists prefaced their publications with extravagant letters of dedication; they might, or they might not, be rewarded with a gift in return. Eventually, different kinds of incentives, including prizes and awards, as well as new, salaried academic positions, became more common and the favor of particular wealthy patrons diminished in importance. But at the height of the Renaissance, early scientists relied on gifts from powerful princes to compensate and advertise their efforts.

With courtiers all vying for a patron’s attention, scientific gifts had to be presented with drama and flair. The astronomer Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) presented his newly discovered moons of Jupiter to the Medici dukes of Italy as a "gift" that was literally out of this world. In return, the Medici family "ennobled" Galileo with the title and position of court philosopher and mathematician. If a gift succeeded, the gift-giver might, like Galileo in this case, be fortunate enough to receive a gift in return. Gift-givers could not, however, predict what form a patron’s gift would take, and they might find themselves burdened with offers they couldn’t refuse. Tycho Brahe (1546–1601), the great Danish Renaissance astronomer, received everything from exotic animals to chemical secrets in return for his discoveries.

By the early-17th century, scientific promoters realized that gift-giving was ill-suited to encouraging experimental science. Experimentation required many individuals to collect data in many places across long periods of time. Gifts emphasized competitive individualism at a time when scientific collaboration and the often humdrum work of empirical observation were paramount.

While it was accepted that some competitive rivalry helped to inspire and advance science, scientific reformers believed that too much led to the ostentation that too often plagued courtly gift-giving. Most of all, reformers feared an individual would not tackle a problem that couldn’t be finished and presented to a patron in his or her lifetime – or even if they did, their findings might die with them.

For these reasons, promoters of experimental science saw the reform of rewards as integral to radical changes in the pace and scale of scientific discovery. For example, Sir Francis Bacon (1561–1626), lord chancellor of England and an influential booster of experimental science, emphasized the importance even of "approximations" or unfinished attempts at reaching a particular goal. Instead of dissipating their efforts attempting to appease patrons, many researchers, he hoped, could be stimulated to work toward the same ends via a well-publicized research wish list. Bacon coined the term "desiderata", still used by researchers today to denote widespread research goals. He also suggested many ingenious ways to advance discovery by stimulating the human hunger for fame; a row of statues celebrating famous inventors of the past, for example, could be paired with a row of empty plinths upon which researchers might imagine their own busts one day resting.

Bacon’s techniques inspired one of his chief admirers, the reformer Samuel Hartlib (circa 1600–1662) to collect many schemes for reforming the system of recognition. One proposed that rewards should go not only "to such as exactly hit the marke, but even to those that probably misse it," because their errors would stimulate others and make "active braines to beate about for New Inventions." Hartlib planned a centralized office systematizing rewards for those who "expect Rewards for Services done to the King or State, and know not where to pitch and what to desire."

Collaborative scientific societies, beginning in the mid-17th century, distanced rewards from the whims and demands of individual patrons. The periodicals that many new scientific societies started publishing offered a new medium that allowed authors to tackle ambitious research problems that might not individually produce a complete publication pleasing to a dedicatee. The societies saw their periodicals as a means to entice discovery by offering credit. Today’s Leopoldina, the German national scientific society, founded its publication in 1670. According to its bylaws, those who might not otherwise publish their findings could see them "exhibited to the world … with the praiseworthy mention of their name" – an important step on the way to standardizing scientific citation.

States might also offer rewards for solutions to problems, most famously in the case of the prize offered by the British government in 1714 for figuring out how to determine longitude at sea. Some in the 17th century likened this long-sought discovery to the philosopher’s stone. The idea of using a prize to highlight a specific problem is alive and well today. In fact, some contemporary scientific prizes, such as the Simons Foundation’s "Cracking the Glass Problem," set forth specific questions that still need to be resolved.

The shift from gift-giving to prize-giving completely transformed the rules of engagement in scientific discovery. Of course, the need for monetary support hasn’t gone away. Obtaining financial support can still be a sizable part of what it takes to get science done today. Succeeding in grant competitions might seem mystifying, and winning a career-changing Nobel might come as a bolt out of the blue. But researchers can take comfort that they no longer have to present their innovations on bended knee as wondrous gifts that will appeal to the whims of individual patrons.

Questions 27–30: Yes/No/Not Given

Do the following statements agree with the information given in the Reading Passage? Choose: YES if the statement agrees with the views of the writer, NO if the statement contradicts the views of the writer, NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this

27
The belief that progress depended on scientists benefiting from their work dates from the 17th century.
28
Early scientists could be confident of receiving patronage if they dedicated their work appropriately.
29
Galileo considered his discovery of the moons of Jupiter to be one of his most important contributions to science.
30
Some gifts bestowed by patrons were more welcome than others.

Questions 31–35: Multiple Choice

Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or D.

31
What did promoters of science begin to understand by the early-17th century?
- A. the benefits of making science more appealing
- B. the importance of up-to-date scientific equipment
- C. the impact of inaccurate data on scientific research
- D. the need for scientists to share their work with one another
32
What was scientific reformers' greatest concern about the patronage system?
- A. It was often restricted to royal courts.
- B. It led to unhealthy competition for resources.
- C. It resulted in scientists' work not always being judged on its merits.
- D. It encouraged scientists to avoid research that took many years to complete.
33
Why does the writer refer to a row of statues?
- A. To propose how research goals should evolve
- B. To compare the achievements of different scientists
- C. To illustrate how a desire for recognition could be exploited
- D. To provide examples of important scientists from the past
34
It was accepted under one of Samuel Hartlib's schemes that
- A. inspiration was hard to achieve.
- B. failure could bring about positive results.
- C. scientists needed assistance in record keeping.
- D. scientific research should be given a higher status.
35
What is the writer doing in the eighth paragraph?
- A. explaining how journals contributed to scientific progress
- B. describing how research projects became more ambitious
- C. indicating how scientific societies expanded their membership
- D. suggesting how nations attracted the best scientific researchers

Questions 36–40: Summary Completion

Complete the summary using the list of words, A–J, below.

A. funding

B. likelihood

C. navigation

D. whims

E. investigation

F. value

G. ambitions

H. method

I. proof

J. scale

Scientific progress has long been encouraged through prizes. A famous case was that of the reward offered in 1714 by the British government to resolve the problem of maritime 36 __________. The practice of prize-giving persists today, and in some cases, for example the Simons Foundation's 'Cracking the Glass Problem', details are provided on the particular areas of 37 __________ that should be focused on. Prize-giving changed have to secure 38 __________ for their research. But they should reassure themselves with the fact that although there might be little 39 __________ of them winning a Nobel Prize, at least they no longer have to satisfy the arbitrary 40 __________ of individual patrons.

答题卡

边做边填 — 即时本地判分，所有错题自动记录到错题本，并附带对应讲解。

数据保存在本设备 — 无需账号。如需同步进度，请在进度页登录。

显示答案

1. NOT GIVEN
There is no information in the passage comparing the damage caused by fire to that caused by flood, so the answer is NOT GIVEN.
2. FALSE
The passage says the flow averaged 1,500 cubic metres per second, but every eight years it rose to almost 3,000 cubic metres, not 1,500, so the answer is FALSE.
3. NOT GIVEN
The passage mentions that tributaries are not powerful enough to distribute sediment in an ecologically valuable way, but it does not clearly state that their contribution has little impact, so the answer is NOT GIVEN.
4. FALSE
The passage explains that trout and chub co-existed until the dam was built, so the decrease in chubs is not always caused by the introduction of trout, making the answer FALSE.
5. TRUE
It says that at first, the 1996 artificial flood seemed successful because the floodwaters built up sandbanks and infused the river with sediment, so the answer is TRUE.
6. TRUE
The passage states that the current artificial flood is less than 1,200 cubic metres a second, which is smaller than even an average spring flood, so the answer is TRUE.
7. NOT GIVEN
There is no information in the passage about mighty floods producing clean and high-quality water, so the answer is NOT GIVEN.
8. spring
The passage says, 'Spring Snow from as far away as Wyoming would melt and swell the Colorado river,' so the answer is 'spring.'
9. sediment
It says the only sediment collected after the dam was built came from tiny, undammed tributaries, so the answer is 'sediment.'
10. razorback sucker
The passage lists species that vanished, including 'the Colorado pike-minnow, the razorback sucker and the roundtail chub,' so the answer is 'razorback sucker.'
11. common carp
It mentions that 'aliens including fathead minnows, channel catfish and common carp... have moved in,' so the answer is 'common carp.'
12. visibility
The passage says the chub depended on the poor visibility created by the thick, red water to hide from predators, so the answer is 'visibility.'
13. sand
It says that in 2004, 'the volume of sand available behind the dam was too low to rebuild the sandbanks,' so the answer is 'sand.'
14. E
Section E mentions a 'piece of ingenious maths (for which a man called Wassily Leontief got a Nobel Prize),' which is a reference to an award-winning formula.
15. B
Section B says, 'Measuring carbon footprints is a long way from being an exact process,' acknowledging the general shortcomings of carbon footprint calculations.
16. F
Section F describes a model developed 'in collaboration with Lancaster University,' which is a mention of a working partnership.
17. D
Section D describes process-based life-cycle analysis as 'back-breaking work,' showing the demanding nature of this method.
18. G
Section G explains that combining the two methods is 'like looking through both a microscope and a telescope at the same time,' showing the advantage of using both.
19. F
Section F notes that the model 'treats imported products as though they had the same carbon intensity as products from within the UK,' which is a comparison between goods from home and abroad.
20. A / C
Option A is correct because the passage says process-based life-cycle analysis 'may sound simple, but it is not at all,' and option C is correct because it is described as 'the most common approach to carbon footprint calculations.' Option B is wrong because the passage says it usually underestimates, not exaggerates, results.
22. C / E
Option C is correct because input-output analysis is described as 'one hundred per cent complete,' and option E is correct because it says 'if you know how much something costs, you can get an instant crude estimate of its carbon footprint.' Option B is wrong because input-output analysis starts with the whole economy, not the manufacturing process.
24. government
Section F says the model 'draws mainly on data obtained from government sources,' so the answer is 'government.'
25. weakness
Section F says, 'A key weakness, which I sometimes adjust for, is that it treats imported products as though they had the same carbon intensity,' so the answer is 'weakness.'
26. products
The passage says the model treats imported products as though they had the same carbon intensity as products from within the UK, so the answer is 'products.'
27. YES
The passage says, 'promoters of science realized the need for some system of recognition and reward,' showing that the belief in benefiting from work dates from the 17th century, so the answer is YES.
28. NO
The passage says early scientists might or might not be rewarded with a gift in return, so they could not be confident, making the answer NO.
29. NOT GIVEN
There is no information about Galileo's opinion of his discovery's importance, so the answer is NOT GIVEN.
30. YES
The passage says Tycho Brahe received everything from exotic animals to chemical secrets, and some gifts might be burdensome, so some gifts were more welcome than others, making the answer YES.
31. D
The passage says experimentation required many individuals to collect data and that gifts emphasized individualism, showing the need for scientists to share their work, so the answer is D.
32. D
The passage says reformers feared individuals would not tackle problems that couldn’t be finished and presented in their lifetime, so the answer is D.
33. C
The passage says Bacon suggested statues to stimulate the human hunger for fame, showing how a desire for recognition could be exploited, so the answer is C.
34. B
Hartlib's scheme said rewards should go to those who 'probably misse it,' because their errors would stimulate others, so the answer is B.
35. A
The passage says periodicals offered a new medium for authors and allowed findings to be published with credit, so the writer is explaining how journals contributed to scientific progress, making the answer A.
36. navigation
The passage says the British government offered a prize in 1714 for figuring out how to determine longitude at sea, which is a problem of maritime navigation, so the answer is 'navigation.'
37. investigation
The passage mentions research wish lists and specific questions that need to be resolved, so the answer is 'investigation.'
38. funding
The passage says obtaining financial support is still needed, so prize-giving changed how researchers have to secure funding, so the answer is 'funding.'
39. likelihood
The passage says winning a Nobel might come as a bolt out of the blue, meaning there is little likelihood, so the answer is 'likelihood.'
40. whims
The passage says researchers no longer have to satisfy the whims of individual patrons, so the answer is 'whims.'

想要完整的限时体验？试试免费的完整模拟考试——真实考生回忆的考题，真实机考界面。

开始模拟考试 →