Pular para o conteúdo
Dicas do ENEMEntrar

Questões de Inglês do ENEM

Questões de Inglês, da área de Linguagens, com gabarito em cada página.

Resultados

577 questões encontradas. Mostrando a página 4 de 29.

  • BE07A7CE-FF

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    Can talking on a mobile phone be hazardous to your health? It is difficult to know for sure. Some research suggests that heavy users of mobile phones are at a greater risk of developing cancerous brain tumours. However, many other studies suggest there are no links between cancer and mobile phone use.

    The main problem with the current research is that mobile phones have only been popular since the 1990s. As a result, it is impossible to study long-term exposure to mobile phones. This concerns many health professionals who point out that certain cancers can take over twenty years to develop. Another concern about these studies is that many have been funded by the mobile phone industry or those who benefit from it.

    Over five billion people now use mobile phones on a daily basis, and many talk for more than an hour a day. Mobile phone antennas are similar to microwave ovens. While both rely on electromagnetic radiation (EMR), the radio waves in mobile phones are lower in frequency. Microwave ovens have radio wave frequencies that are high enough to cook food, and they are also known to be dangerous to human tissues like those in the brain. The concern is that the lowerfrequency radio waves that mobile phones rely on may also be dangerous. It seems logical that holding a heat source near your brain for a long period of time is a potential health hazard.

    Some researchers believe that other types of wireless technology may also be dangerous to human health, including cordless phones, wireless gaming consoles, and laptop or tablet computers with wireless connections. They suggest replacing all cordless and wireless devices with wired ones where possible. They also say that many cordless phones can emit dangerous levels of Electromagnetic Radiation even when they are not in use. They even suggest keeping electronic devices such as desktop and tablet computers out of the bedroom, or at least six feet from the head while we're sleeping.

    A growing number of health professionals worldwide are recommending that mobile phone users err on the side of caution until more definitive studies can be conducted. They use the example of tobacco to illustrate the potential risks. Many years ago, people smoked freely and were not concerned about the effects of cigarettes on their health. Today, people know that cigarettes cause lung cancer, though it is still unknown exactly how or why. Some doctors fear that the same thing will happen with mobile phones. In May 2016, the UK's Independent newspaper reported on research by the US government's National Toxicology Program that showed a slight increase in brain tumours among rats exposed to the type of radio frequencies commonly emitted by mobile phones. This doesn't prove that mobile phones can cause brain tumours in humans, but it does show that it's possible. As a result, many experts now recommend texting or using head sets or speaker phones instead of holding a mobile phone to the ear.

    (Source: https://www.englishclub.com/reading/health/cell-phone.htm)

    Considering the text, fill the parenthesis with T (true) or F (false):

    ( ) One of the problems of current research on the hazards of mobile phones is that they have been popular for too long, which creates a lot of data do be analyzed.
    ( ) Regarding the risks mobile phones can pose to our health, health professionals worldwide believe it is better to be cautious until more conclusive research is conducted.
    ( ) The frequency used by mobile phones is significantly higher than the frequency of microwaves, hence the health problems.
    ( ) Health professionals use the example of the tobacco industry to illustrate that mobile phones can be dangerous, even though research is still not conclusive on that.

    The correct sequence, from top to bottom is:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão be07a7ce-ff
  • BE04BDD3-FF

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    Can talking on a mobile phone be hazardous to your health? It is difficult to know for sure. Some research suggests that heavy users of mobile phones are at a greater risk of developing cancerous brain tumours. However, many other studies suggest there are no links between cancer and mobile phone use.

    The main problem with the current research is that mobile phones have only been popular since the 1990s. As a result, it is impossible to study long-term exposure to mobile phones. This concerns many health professionals who point out that certain cancers can take over twenty years to develop. Another concern about these studies is that many have been funded by the mobile phone industry or those who benefit from it.

    Over five billion people now use mobile phones on a daily basis, and many talk for more than an hour a day. Mobile phone antennas are similar to microwave ovens. While both rely on electromagnetic radiation (EMR), the radio waves in mobile phones are lower in frequency. Microwave ovens have radio wave frequencies that are high enough to cook food, and they are also known to be dangerous to human tissues like those in the brain. The concern is that the lowerfrequency radio waves that mobile phones rely on may also be dangerous. It seems logical that holding a heat source near your brain for a long period of time is a potential health hazard.

    Some researchers believe that other types of wireless technology may also be dangerous to human health, including cordless phones, wireless gaming consoles, and laptop or tablet computers with wireless connections. They suggest replacing all cordless and wireless devices with wired ones where possible. They also say that many cordless phones can emit dangerous levels of Electromagnetic Radiation even when they are not in use. They even suggest keeping electronic devices such as desktop and tablet computers out of the bedroom, or at least six feet from the head while we're sleeping.

    A growing number of health professionals worldwide are recommending that mobile phone users err on the side of caution until more definitive studies can be conducted. They use the example of tobacco to illustrate the potential risks. Many years ago, people smoked freely and were not concerned about the effects of cigarettes on their health. Today, people know that cigarettes cause lung cancer, though it is still unknown exactly how or why. Some doctors fear that the same thing will happen with mobile phones. In May 2016, the UK's Independent newspaper reported on research by the US government's National Toxicology Program that showed a slight increase in brain tumours among rats exposed to the type of radio frequencies commonly emitted by mobile phones. This doesn't prove that mobile phones can cause brain tumours in humans, but it does show that it's possible. As a result, many experts now recommend texting or using head sets or speaker phones instead of holding a mobile phone to the ear.

    (Source: https://www.englishclub.com/reading/health/cell-phone.htm)

    In the fourth paragraph, the modal verb may expresses:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão be04bdd3-ff
  • BE00F8CC-FF

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017FácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    Can talking on a mobile phone be hazardous to your health? It is difficult to know for sure. Some research suggests that heavy users of mobile phones are at a greater risk of developing cancerous brain tumours. However, many other studies suggest there are no links between cancer and mobile phone use.

    The main problem with the current research is that mobile phones have only been popular since the 1990s. As a result, it is impossible to study long-term exposure to mobile phones. This concerns many health professionals who point out that certain cancers can take over twenty years to develop. Another concern about these studies is that many have been funded by the mobile phone industry or those who benefit from it.

    Over five billion people now use mobile phones on a daily basis, and many talk for more than an hour a day. Mobile phone antennas are similar to microwave ovens. While both rely on electromagnetic radiation (EMR), the radio waves in mobile phones are lower in frequency. Microwave ovens have radio wave frequencies that are high enough to cook food, and they are also known to be dangerous to human tissues like those in the brain. The concern is that the lowerfrequency radio waves that mobile phones rely on may also be dangerous. It seems logical that holding a heat source near your brain for a long period of time is a potential health hazard.

    Some researchers believe that other types of wireless technology may also be dangerous to human health, including cordless phones, wireless gaming consoles, and laptop or tablet computers with wireless connections. They suggest replacing all cordless and wireless devices with wired ones where possible. They also say that many cordless phones can emit dangerous levels of Electromagnetic Radiation even when they are not in use. They even suggest keeping electronic devices such as desktop and tablet computers out of the bedroom, or at least six feet from the head while we're sleeping.

    A growing number of health professionals worldwide are recommending that mobile phone users err on the side of caution until more definitive studies can be conducted. They use the example of tobacco to illustrate the potential risks. Many years ago, people smoked freely and were not concerned about the effects of cigarettes on their health. Today, people know that cigarettes cause lung cancer, though it is still unknown exactly how or why. Some doctors fear that the same thing will happen with mobile phones. In May 2016, the UK's Independent newspaper reported on research by the US government's National Toxicology Program that showed a slight increase in brain tumours among rats exposed to the type of radio frequencies commonly emitted by mobile phones. This doesn't prove that mobile phones can cause brain tumours in humans, but it does show that it's possible. As a result, many experts now recommend texting or using head sets or speaker phones instead of holding a mobile phone to the ear.

    (Source: https://www.englishclub.com/reading/health/cell-phone.htm)

    In the first paragraph, the word however tells the reader that the following sentence will:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão be00f8cc-ff
  • BDFE2C1F-FF

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    Can talking on a mobile phone be hazardous to your health? It is difficult to know for sure. Some research suggests that heavy users of mobile phones are at a greater risk of developing cancerous brain tumours. However, many other studies suggest there are no links between cancer and mobile phone use.

    The main problem with the current research is that mobile phones have only been popular since the 1990s. As a result, it is impossible to study long-term exposure to mobile phones. This concerns many health professionals who point out that certain cancers can take over twenty years to develop. Another concern about these studies is that many have been funded by the mobile phone industry or those who benefit from it.

    Over five billion people now use mobile phones on a daily basis, and many talk for more than an hour a day. Mobile phone antennas are similar to microwave ovens. While both rely on electromagnetic radiation (EMR), the radio waves in mobile phones are lower in frequency. Microwave ovens have radio wave frequencies that are high enough to cook food, and they are also known to be dangerous to human tissues like those in the brain. The concern is that the lowerfrequency radio waves that mobile phones rely on may also be dangerous. It seems logical that holding a heat source near your brain for a long period of time is a potential health hazard.

    Some researchers believe that other types of wireless technology may also be dangerous to human health, including cordless phones, wireless gaming consoles, and laptop or tablet computers with wireless connections. They suggest replacing all cordless and wireless devices with wired ones where possible. They also say that many cordless phones can emit dangerous levels of Electromagnetic Radiation even when they are not in use. They even suggest keeping electronic devices such as desktop and tablet computers out of the bedroom, or at least six feet from the head while we're sleeping.

    A growing number of health professionals worldwide are recommending that mobile phone users err on the side of caution until more definitive studies can be conducted. They use the example of tobacco to illustrate the potential risks. Many years ago, people smoked freely and were not concerned about the effects of cigarettes on their health. Today, people know that cigarettes cause lung cancer, though it is still unknown exactly how or why. Some doctors fear that the same thing will happen with mobile phones. In May 2016, the UK's Independent newspaper reported on research by the US government's National Toxicology Program that showed a slight increase in brain tumours among rats exposed to the type of radio frequencies commonly emitted by mobile phones. This doesn't prove that mobile phones can cause brain tumours in humans, but it does show that it's possible. As a result, many experts now recommend texting or using head sets or speaker phones instead of holding a mobile phone to the ear.

    (Source: https://www.englishclub.com/reading/health/cell-phone.htm)

    The main objective of the article is to:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão bdfe2c1f-ff
  • 1477F25E-FF

    Inglês

    Futuro simples | Simple future    UNICENTRO · 2017FácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    In a nationwide referendum, the Turkish population has voted for a change in the country’s constitution. It will give the president more power and reduce the influence of parliament. 51.3% of the voters said “Yes” to a change , while the “No” side received 48.7%. For months, the population has been divided on the issue. The new constitution is the biggest change in the structure of Turkey since it was founded in the early 20th century. 
    The referendum was a victory for Turkish President Recip Erdogan, who, together with his ruling AKP Party , called the country’s people to expand presidential powers. Erdogan became Turkey’s president in 2014 after being Prime Minster for over a decade. In the last few years he gained more and more power, especially after the attempted coup last summer. With the new constitution in place Erdogan could stay president until 2029.
    Recip Erdogan insists that the new constitution will make Turkey more modern and easier to govern. Opponents of Erdogan claim that the change will make the president too powerful and will turn the country into a dictatorship ruled by one person. They say that, in future, the president cannot be controlled or supervised by parliament or the courts. In Turkey’s new constitution the president will have wide-ranging powers. He will not only be able to appoint his own minsters and choose the vice president, but also have the power to dissolve parliament and declare a state of emergency. He will also be able to appoint judges to the highest court, similar to the American President. 
    The European Union has been highly critical of the referendum and stated that a change towards more presidential power will not help Turkey become a member of the EU. It is afraid that, once Erdogan has more power, the country will disregard human rights and introduce the death penalty. 
    (Source: http://www.english-online.at/news-articles/world/europe/turkey-votes-for-new-constitution.htm)

    __________ is your birthday?

    It is ________ November.

    Great! We ________ celebrate together.

    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 1477f25e-ff
  • 14725BFE-FF

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017FácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    In a nationwide referendum, the Turkish population has voted for a change in the country’s constitution. It will give the president more power and reduce the influence of parliament. 51.3% of the voters said “Yes” to a change , while the “No” side received 48.7%. For months, the population has been divided on the issue. The new constitution is the biggest change in the structure of Turkey since it was founded in the early 20th century. 
    The referendum was a victory for Turkish President Recip Erdogan, who, together with his ruling AKP Party , called the country’s people to expand presidential powers. Erdogan became Turkey’s president in 2014 after being Prime Minster for over a decade. In the last few years he gained more and more power, especially after the attempted coup last summer. With the new constitution in place Erdogan could stay president until 2029.
    Recip Erdogan insists that the new constitution will make Turkey more modern and easier to govern. Opponents of Erdogan claim that the change will make the president too powerful and will turn the country into a dictatorship ruled by one person. They say that, in future, the president cannot be controlled or supervised by parliament or the courts. In Turkey’s new constitution the president will have wide-ranging powers. He will not only be able to appoint his own minsters and choose the vice president, but also have the power to dissolve parliament and declare a state of emergency. He will also be able to appoint judges to the highest court, similar to the American President. 
    The European Union has been highly critical of the referendum and stated that a change towards more presidential power will not help Turkey become a member of the EU. It is afraid that, once Erdogan has more power, the country will disregard human rights and introduce the death penalty. 
    (Source: http://www.english-online.at/news-articles/world/europe/turkey-votes-for-new-constitution.htm)
    Yesterday we had a wonderful time. We ________ to a great party.
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 14725bfe-ff
  • 14685383-FF

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    In a nationwide referendum, the Turkish population has voted for a change in the country’s constitution. It will give the president more power and reduce the influence of parliament. 51.3% of the voters said “Yes” to a change , while the “No” side received 48.7%. For months, the population has been divided on the issue. The new constitution is the biggest change in the structure of Turkey since it was founded in the early 20th century. 
    The referendum was a victory for Turkish President Recip Erdogan, who, together with his ruling AKP Party , called the country’s people to expand presidential powers. Erdogan became Turkey’s president in 2014 after being Prime Minster for over a decade. In the last few years he gained more and more power, especially after the attempted coup last summer. With the new constitution in place Erdogan could stay president until 2029.
    Recip Erdogan insists that the new constitution will make Turkey more modern and easier to govern. Opponents of Erdogan claim that the change will make the president too powerful and will turn the country into a dictatorship ruled by one person. They say that, in future, the president cannot be controlled or supervised by parliament or the courts. In Turkey’s new constitution the president will have wide-ranging powers. He will not only be able to appoint his own minsters and choose the vice president, but also have the power to dissolve parliament and declare a state of emergency. He will also be able to appoint judges to the highest court, similar to the American President. 
    The European Union has been highly critical of the referendum and stated that a change towards more presidential power will not help Turkey become a member of the EU. It is afraid that, once Erdogan has more power, the country will disregard human rights and introduce the death penalty. 
    (Source: http://www.english-online.at/news-articles/world/europe/turkey-votes-for-new-constitution.htm)
    In the third paragraph, the word they refers to:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 14685383-ff
  • 14634A15-FF

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017FácilEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    In a nationwide referendum, the Turkish population has voted for a change in the country’s constitution. It will give the president more power and reduce the influence of parliament. 51.3% of the voters said “Yes” to a change , while the “No” side received 48.7%. For months, the population has been divided on the issue. The new constitution is the biggest change in the structure of Turkey since it was founded in the early 20th century. 
    The referendum was a victory for Turkish President Recip Erdogan, who, together with his ruling AKP Party , called the country’s people to expand presidential powers. Erdogan became Turkey’s president in 2014 after being Prime Minster for over a decade. In the last few years he gained more and more power, especially after the attempted coup last summer. With the new constitution in place Erdogan could stay president until 2029.
    Recip Erdogan insists that the new constitution will make Turkey more modern and easier to govern. Opponents of Erdogan claim that the change will make the president too powerful and will turn the country into a dictatorship ruled by one person. They say that, in future, the president cannot be controlled or supervised by parliament or the courts. In Turkey’s new constitution the president will have wide-ranging powers. He will not only be able to appoint his own minsters and choose the vice president, but also have the power to dissolve parliament and declare a state of emergency. He will also be able to appoint judges to the highest court, similar to the American President. 
    The European Union has been highly critical of the referendum and stated that a change towards more presidential power will not help Turkey become a member of the EU. It is afraid that, once Erdogan has more power, the country will disregard human rights and introduce the death penalty. 
    (Source: http://www.english-online.at/news-articles/world/europe/turkey-votes-for-new-constitution.htm)

    According to the text, answer true (T) or false (F):


    ( ) The referendum was held only in some parts of Turkey

    ( ) The referendum has reduced Recip Erdogan’s presidential powers.

    ( ) With the new constitution, the Turkish president will not be able to appoint his own ministers.

    ( ) The European Union that the referendum is not going to help Turkey become a member of the

    The correct sequence, from top to bottom is:

    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 14634a15-ff
  • 1584E336-FD

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Re-Planting a Forest, One Drone at a Time


    That funny little buzz you hear in the forest may not just be the hum of summer insects. In the near future it could be a small fleet of drones, coming to replant and restore forests that have been stripped of trees by industrial-scale deforestation. It’s all part of an ambitious plan by BioCarbon Engineering, a U.K.-based startup on a global mission to battle widespread clear-cutting, which strips more than 26 billion trees off the planet each year. CEO Lauren Fletcher, who spent 20 years as an engineer with NASA, says the only way to fight industrial-scale deforestation is with industrial-scale reforestation. Their idea: plant 1 billion trees a year. The first targets are in South Africa and the Amazonian jungles, both of which have suffered from widespread forest eradication.

    BioCarbon’s reforestation scheme is simple and efficient. Here’s a quick look at how it plans to deploy its drone fleet: 


    1 Do a 3-D aerial survey. First, drones are sent to fly over a potential planting zone, snapping photos that create 3-D maps of the area to be reforested. The number of drones will vary depending up on the size of the seeding.

    2 Create a seeding plan. Once all that terrain data has been analyzed, it then generates a seeding pattern that best suits the terrain.

    3 Load the seed pods. The drones, which are equipped with guidance and control software, carry pressurized canisters of seed pods with germinated seeds immersed in a nutrient-rich gel.

    4 Hover and plant. Flying at a height of 1 or 2 meters, the drones follow the planting patterns, firing the biodegradable seed pods down to the ground. The pods break open upon impact, allowing the germinated seed a chance to take root.

    5 Monitor growth. After planting, the drones do low-level flights to assess the health of the sprouts and saplings.


    Such “precision forestry,” as BioCarbon calls it, is extremely efficient. A farmer might hand plant as many as 3,000 seeds a day; Fletcher says his drones can drop up to 36,000 seed pods daily, often in areas where a human can’t reach. Working with local ecologists, BioCarbon will use the drones to spread a variety of tree species, as well as microorganisms and fungi designed to improve the soil quality. “The central focus is ecosystem restoration,” Fletcher says.

    On a planetary climatological scale, Morton notes that “tropical deforestation plays a big role in global climate cycles,” claiming the accelerated pace of cutting and burning of forests accounted for 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the 1990s. Fletcher and his team want to help reverse that trend. “By planting at the scale we’re looking at,” he says, “we can make a real longterm impact. We hope to do a lot of good in the world.”


    (Adapted from https://www.wired.com/brandlab/2015/07/re-planting-forest-one-drone-time/. Access on 22/8/2017)

    Choose the best answer, according to the text. Refer to the words in bold when necessary:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 1584e336-fd
  • 15803E20-FD

    Inglês

    Vocabulário | Vocabulary    UNICENTRO · 2017MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Re-Planting a Forest, One Drone at a Time


    That funny little buzz you hear in the forest may not just be the hum of summer insects. In the near future it could be a small fleet of drones, coming to replant and restore forests that have been stripped of trees by industrial-scale deforestation. It’s all part of an ambitious plan by BioCarbon Engineering, a U.K.-based startup on a global mission to battle widespread clear-cutting, which strips more than 26 billion trees off the planet each year. CEO Lauren Fletcher, who spent 20 years as an engineer with NASA, says the only way to fight industrial-scale deforestation is with industrial-scale reforestation. Their idea: plant 1 billion trees a year. The first targets are in South Africa and the Amazonian jungles, both of which have suffered from widespread forest eradication.

    BioCarbon’s reforestation scheme is simple and efficient. Here’s a quick look at how it plans to deploy its drone fleet: 


    1 Do a 3-D aerial survey. First, drones are sent to fly over a potential planting zone, snapping photos that create 3-D maps of the area to be reforested. The number of drones will vary depending up on the size of the seeding.

    2 Create a seeding plan. Once all that terrain data has been analyzed, it then generates a seeding pattern that best suits the terrain.

    3 Load the seed pods. The drones, which are equipped with guidance and control software, carry pressurized canisters of seed pods with germinated seeds immersed in a nutrient-rich gel.

    4 Hover and plant. Flying at a height of 1 or 2 meters, the drones follow the planting patterns, firing the biodegradable seed pods down to the ground. The pods break open upon impact, allowing the germinated seed a chance to take root.

    5 Monitor growth. After planting, the drones do low-level flights to assess the health of the sprouts and saplings.


    Such “precision forestry,” as BioCarbon calls it, is extremely efficient. A farmer might hand plant as many as 3,000 seeds a day; Fletcher says his drones can drop up to 36,000 seed pods daily, often in areas where a human can’t reach. Working with local ecologists, BioCarbon will use the drones to spread a variety of tree species, as well as microorganisms and fungi designed to improve the soil quality. “The central focus is ecosystem restoration,” Fletcher says.

    On a planetary climatological scale, Morton notes that “tropical deforestation plays a big role in global climate cycles,” claiming the accelerated pace of cutting and burning of forests accounted for 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the 1990s. Fletcher and his team want to help reverse that trend. “By planting at the scale we’re looking at,” he says, “we can make a real longterm impact. We hope to do a lot of good in the world.”


    (Adapted from https://www.wired.com/brandlab/2015/07/re-planting-forest-one-drone-time/. Access on 22/8/2017)

    The word widespread is closest in meaning to
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 15803e20-fd
  • 157BA27F-FD

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Re-Planting a Forest, One Drone at a Time


    That funny little buzz you hear in the forest may not just be the hum of summer insects. In the near future it could be a small fleet of drones, coming to replant and restore forests that have been stripped of trees by industrial-scale deforestation. It’s all part of an ambitious plan by BioCarbon Engineering, a U.K.-based startup on a global mission to battle widespread clear-cutting, which strips more than 26 billion trees off the planet each year. CEO Lauren Fletcher, who spent 20 years as an engineer with NASA, says the only way to fight industrial-scale deforestation is with industrial-scale reforestation. Their idea: plant 1 billion trees a year. The first targets are in South Africa and the Amazonian jungles, both of which have suffered from widespread forest eradication.

    BioCarbon’s reforestation scheme is simple and efficient. Here’s a quick look at how it plans to deploy its drone fleet: 


    1 Do a 3-D aerial survey. First, drones are sent to fly over a potential planting zone, snapping photos that create 3-D maps of the area to be reforested. The number of drones will vary depending up on the size of the seeding.

    2 Create a seeding plan. Once all that terrain data has been analyzed, it then generates a seeding pattern that best suits the terrain.

    3 Load the seed pods. The drones, which are equipped with guidance and control software, carry pressurized canisters of seed pods with germinated seeds immersed in a nutrient-rich gel.

    4 Hover and plant. Flying at a height of 1 or 2 meters, the drones follow the planting patterns, firing the biodegradable seed pods down to the ground. The pods break open upon impact, allowing the germinated seed a chance to take root.

    5 Monitor growth. After planting, the drones do low-level flights to assess the health of the sprouts and saplings.


    Such “precision forestry,” as BioCarbon calls it, is extremely efficient. A farmer might hand plant as many as 3,000 seeds a day; Fletcher says his drones can drop up to 36,000 seed pods daily, often in areas where a human can’t reach. Working with local ecologists, BioCarbon will use the drones to spread a variety of tree species, as well as microorganisms and fungi designed to improve the soil quality. “The central focus is ecosystem restoration,” Fletcher says.

    On a planetary climatological scale, Morton notes that “tropical deforestation plays a big role in global climate cycles,” claiming the accelerated pace of cutting and burning of forests accounted for 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the 1990s. Fletcher and his team want to help reverse that trend. “By planting at the scale we’re looking at,” he says, “we can make a real longterm impact. We hope to do a lot of good in the world.”


    (Adapted from https://www.wired.com/brandlab/2015/07/re-planting-forest-one-drone-time/. Access on 22/8/2017)

    The words buzz and hum both represent:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 157ba27f-fd
  • 1578AD9E-FD

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Re-Planting a Forest, One Drone at a Time


    That funny little buzz you hear in the forest may not just be the hum of summer insects. In the near future it could be a small fleet of drones, coming to replant and restore forests that have been stripped of trees by industrial-scale deforestation. It’s all part of an ambitious plan by BioCarbon Engineering, a U.K.-based startup on a global mission to battle widespread clear-cutting, which strips more than 26 billion trees off the planet each year. CEO Lauren Fletcher, who spent 20 years as an engineer with NASA, says the only way to fight industrial-scale deforestation is with industrial-scale reforestation. Their idea: plant 1 billion trees a year. The first targets are in South Africa and the Amazonian jungles, both of which have suffered from widespread forest eradication.

    BioCarbon’s reforestation scheme is simple and efficient. Here’s a quick look at how it plans to deploy its drone fleet: 


    1 Do a 3-D aerial survey. First, drones are sent to fly over a potential planting zone, snapping photos that create 3-D maps of the area to be reforested. The number of drones will vary depending up on the size of the seeding.

    2 Create a seeding plan. Once all that terrain data has been analyzed, it then generates a seeding pattern that best suits the terrain.

    3 Load the seed pods. The drones, which are equipped with guidance and control software, carry pressurized canisters of seed pods with germinated seeds immersed in a nutrient-rich gel.

    4 Hover and plant. Flying at a height of 1 or 2 meters, the drones follow the planting patterns, firing the biodegradable seed pods down to the ground. The pods break open upon impact, allowing the germinated seed a chance to take root.

    5 Monitor growth. After planting, the drones do low-level flights to assess the health of the sprouts and saplings.


    Such “precision forestry,” as BioCarbon calls it, is extremely efficient. A farmer might hand plant as many as 3,000 seeds a day; Fletcher says his drones can drop up to 36,000 seed pods daily, often in areas where a human can’t reach. Working with local ecologists, BioCarbon will use the drones to spread a variety of tree species, as well as microorganisms and fungi designed to improve the soil quality. “The central focus is ecosystem restoration,” Fletcher says.

    On a planetary climatological scale, Morton notes that “tropical deforestation plays a big role in global climate cycles,” claiming the accelerated pace of cutting and burning of forests accounted for 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the 1990s. Fletcher and his team want to help reverse that trend. “By planting at the scale we’re looking at,” he says, “we can make a real longterm impact. We hope to do a lot of good in the world.”


    (Adapted from https://www.wired.com/brandlab/2015/07/re-planting-forest-one-drone-time/. Access on 22/8/2017)

    Considering the text, fill the parenthesis with T (true) or F (false):

    ( ) The drones can drop seeds in places which are hard to access.
    ( ) The drones will make a lot of noise, which can pose a risk to nature.
    ( ) Fletcher and his team expect that the drones will have a positive impact in the long run
    ( ) The drones can only help spread tree species.
    ( ) Despite being simple, BioCarbon’s reforestation scheme is efficient.

    The correct sequence, from top to bottom is:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 1578ad9e-fd
  • 157586C9-FD

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    Re-Planting a Forest, One Drone at a Time


    That funny little buzz you hear in the forest may not just be the hum of summer insects. In the near future it could be a small fleet of drones, coming to replant and restore forests that have been stripped of trees by industrial-scale deforestation. It’s all part of an ambitious plan by BioCarbon Engineering, a U.K.-based startup on a global mission to battle widespread clear-cutting, which strips more than 26 billion trees off the planet each year. CEO Lauren Fletcher, who spent 20 years as an engineer with NASA, says the only way to fight industrial-scale deforestation is with industrial-scale reforestation. Their idea: plant 1 billion trees a year. The first targets are in South Africa and the Amazonian jungles, both of which have suffered from widespread forest eradication.

    BioCarbon’s reforestation scheme is simple and efficient. Here’s a quick look at how it plans to deploy its drone fleet: 


    1 Do a 3-D aerial survey. First, drones are sent to fly over a potential planting zone, snapping photos that create 3-D maps of the area to be reforested. The number of drones will vary depending up on the size of the seeding.

    2 Create a seeding plan. Once all that terrain data has been analyzed, it then generates a seeding pattern that best suits the terrain.

    3 Load the seed pods. The drones, which are equipped with guidance and control software, carry pressurized canisters of seed pods with germinated seeds immersed in a nutrient-rich gel.

    4 Hover and plant. Flying at a height of 1 or 2 meters, the drones follow the planting patterns, firing the biodegradable seed pods down to the ground. The pods break open upon impact, allowing the germinated seed a chance to take root.

    5 Monitor growth. After planting, the drones do low-level flights to assess the health of the sprouts and saplings.


    Such “precision forestry,” as BioCarbon calls it, is extremely efficient. A farmer might hand plant as many as 3,000 seeds a day; Fletcher says his drones can drop up to 36,000 seed pods daily, often in areas where a human can’t reach. Working with local ecologists, BioCarbon will use the drones to spread a variety of tree species, as well as microorganisms and fungi designed to improve the soil quality. “The central focus is ecosystem restoration,” Fletcher says.

    On a planetary climatological scale, Morton notes that “tropical deforestation plays a big role in global climate cycles,” claiming the accelerated pace of cutting and burning of forests accounted for 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the 1990s. Fletcher and his team want to help reverse that trend. “By planting at the scale we’re looking at,” he says, “we can make a real longterm impact. We hope to do a lot of good in the world.”


    (Adapted from https://www.wired.com/brandlab/2015/07/re-planting-forest-one-drone-time/. Access on 22/8/2017)

    According to the text, the drones can:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 157586c9-fd
  • 15711D80-FD

    Inglês

    Sinônimos | Synonyms    UNICENTRO · 2017DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    View from the Rio favelas: 'We're often scared to leave the house in case we're hit by a stray bullet'

    A year has gone by since the Olympic Games. Only 147 of those 365 days ended without the residents of Complexo do Alemão hearing gunshots. After the promises of hope and the Games’ legacy of peace, 218 days were accompanied by a soundtrack of gunfire.

    On 218 days we were afraid we wouldn’t make it home alive; we were scared to leave the house in case we were hit by a stray bullet; on 218 days we were afraid that the walls of our homes might be hit. To pretend that we were not in a war zone, the military police painted their armoured military tanks – popularly called caveirão, or “big skull” – white.

    For a long time I’ve wondered about the reason for the conflict and danger in the favelas of Rio, the same places that hold so much shared affection, culture, art and memory.

    Since the Olympics, residents of the Complexo do Alemão have been afraid of organising a cultural event in the neighbourhood square, or of people gathering outside because an intense shootout might happen without prior notice, with no chance to find protection. It has been 218 days of fear.

    All eyes – and investments – were turned to Brazil when it hosted, over 10 years, three mega sporting events. But the country has failed to keep its promises of peace after the 2007 Pan-American Games, the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympic Games.

    Before the Olympics, the state was completely absent in the favela. Back then we had no cable car – now we do, but it doesn’t work. We did not have family clinics – now we do, but without medical care. There were no police – now there are, and we live with daily shootings. What have the poorest received as a result of the Games? On television, I see only news of corruption.

    Brazil is at war, some say. A war on the poor, justified by drugs. A war that justifies, for many (but not for me) the presence of the Brazilian army in the streets of the city. The beauty of Rio’s natural landscapes contrasts with the conflict of our daily lives, militarised by the government.

    We need to talk about the relationship between violence and drugs. Young people from different favelas are now coming together to think about strategies that we hope can feed into public policies on drugs in Brazil. The #Movimentos movement – which runs discussions and seminars for young people – was created because it isn’t possible to deal with the drugs issue without the input of those who live with the consequences of failed policies. 

    As other countries move towards resolving the issue in a serious way, investing in research and prevention mechanisms in public health services, Brazil invests in more weapons and repression that result in an increase of death and incarceration – particularly among people who are poor, black, young and living in favelas.

    But despite all the fear, all the chaos, we continue to conquer the world, occupying the spaces that we have been historically denied. The Coletivo Papo Reto (Straight Talk Collective) has created a calendar that celebrates the good news and achievements of the people who live in Complexo do Alemão. Many people may not understand what it is that motivates us in the midst of this chaos and fear. I don’t know either – but I feel that I must keep going.

    (Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/aug/19/rio-voices-view-from-the-favelas-olympics-they-
    promised-a-legacy-of-peace-but-brazil-is-now-at-war. Access on 22/8/2017)
    The word input is closest in meaning to:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 15711d80-fd
  • 156DF1AB-FD

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    View from the Rio favelas: 'We're often scared to leave the house in case we're hit by a stray bullet'

    A year has gone by since the Olympic Games. Only 147 of those 365 days ended without the residents of Complexo do Alemão hearing gunshots. After the promises of hope and the Games’ legacy of peace, 218 days were accompanied by a soundtrack of gunfire.

    On 218 days we were afraid we wouldn’t make it home alive; we were scared to leave the house in case we were hit by a stray bullet; on 218 days we were afraid that the walls of our homes might be hit. To pretend that we were not in a war zone, the military police painted their armoured military tanks – popularly called caveirão, or “big skull” – white.

    For a long time I’ve wondered about the reason for the conflict and danger in the favelas of Rio, the same places that hold so much shared affection, culture, art and memory.

    Since the Olympics, residents of the Complexo do Alemão have been afraid of organising a cultural event in the neighbourhood square, or of people gathering outside because an intense shootout might happen without prior notice, with no chance to find protection. It has been 218 days of fear.

    All eyes – and investments – were turned to Brazil when it hosted, over 10 years, three mega sporting events. But the country has failed to keep its promises of peace after the 2007 Pan-American Games, the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympic Games.

    Before the Olympics, the state was completely absent in the favela. Back then we had no cable car – now we do, but it doesn’t work. We did not have family clinics – now we do, but without medical care. There were no police – now there are, and we live with daily shootings. What have the poorest received as a result of the Games? On television, I see only news of corruption.

    Brazil is at war, some say. A war on the poor, justified by drugs. A war that justifies, for many (but not for me) the presence of the Brazilian army in the streets of the city. The beauty of Rio’s natural landscapes contrasts with the conflict of our daily lives, militarised by the government.

    We need to talk about the relationship between violence and drugs. Young people from different favelas are now coming together to think about strategies that we hope can feed into public policies on drugs in Brazil. The #Movimentos movement – which runs discussions and seminars for young people – was created because it isn’t possible to deal with the drugs issue without the input of those who live with the consequences of failed policies. 

    As other countries move towards resolving the issue in a serious way, investing in research and prevention mechanisms in public health services, Brazil invests in more weapons and repression that result in an increase of death and incarceration – particularly among people who are poor, black, young and living in favelas.

    But despite all the fear, all the chaos, we continue to conquer the world, occupying the spaces that we have been historically denied. The Coletivo Papo Reto (Straight Talk Collective) has created a calendar that celebrates the good news and achievements of the people who live in Complexo do Alemão. Many people may not understand what it is that motivates us in the midst of this chaos and fear. I don’t know either – but I feel that I must keep going.

    (Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/aug/19/rio-voices-view-from-the-favelas-olympics-they-
    promised-a-legacy-of-peace-but-brazil-is-now-at-war. Access on 22/8/2017)
    Considering the text, fill the parenthesis with T (true) or F (false):

    ( ) The author agrees with the presence of the Brazilian army in the streets.
    ( ) The #Movimentos movement was created to include the input of the population in the issue of drug violence.
    ( ) The author thinks it’s important to talk about the relationship between violence and drugs.
    ( ) The author knows what motivates people in the midst of fear.
    ( ) Brazil is investing in research and prevention mechanisms in public health services.

    The correct sequence, from top to bottom is:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 156df1ab-fd
  • 156AB8B3-FD

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    View from the Rio favelas: 'We're often scared to leave the house in case we're hit by a stray bullet'

    A year has gone by since the Olympic Games. Only 147 of those 365 days ended without the residents of Complexo do Alemão hearing gunshots. After the promises of hope and the Games’ legacy of peace, 218 days were accompanied by a soundtrack of gunfire.

    On 218 days we were afraid we wouldn’t make it home alive; we were scared to leave the house in case we were hit by a stray bullet; on 218 days we were afraid that the walls of our homes might be hit. To pretend that we were not in a war zone, the military police painted their armoured military tanks – popularly called caveirão, or “big skull” – white.

    For a long time I’ve wondered about the reason for the conflict and danger in the favelas of Rio, the same places that hold so much shared affection, culture, art and memory.

    Since the Olympics, residents of the Complexo do Alemão have been afraid of organising a cultural event in the neighbourhood square, or of people gathering outside because an intense shootout might happen without prior notice, with no chance to find protection. It has been 218 days of fear.

    All eyes – and investments – were turned to Brazil when it hosted, over 10 years, three mega sporting events. But the country has failed to keep its promises of peace after the 2007 Pan-American Games, the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympic Games.

    Before the Olympics, the state was completely absent in the favela. Back then we had no cable car – now we do, but it doesn’t work. We did not have family clinics – now we do, but without medical care. There were no police – now there are, and we live with daily shootings. What have the poorest received as a result of the Games? On television, I see only news of corruption.

    Brazil is at war, some say. A war on the poor, justified by drugs. A war that justifies, for many (but not for me) the presence of the Brazilian army in the streets of the city. The beauty of Rio’s natural landscapes contrasts with the conflict of our daily lives, militarised by the government.

    We need to talk about the relationship between violence and drugs. Young people from different favelas are now coming together to think about strategies that we hope can feed into public policies on drugs in Brazil. The #Movimentos movement – which runs discussions and seminars for young people – was created because it isn’t possible to deal with the drugs issue without the input of those who live with the consequences of failed policies. 

    As other countries move towards resolving the issue in a serious way, investing in research and prevention mechanisms in public health services, Brazil invests in more weapons and repression that result in an increase of death and incarceration – particularly among people who are poor, black, young and living in favelas.

    But despite all the fear, all the chaos, we continue to conquer the world, occupying the spaces that we have been historically denied. The Coletivo Papo Reto (Straight Talk Collective) has created a calendar that celebrates the good news and achievements of the people who live in Complexo do Alemão. Many people may not understand what it is that motivates us in the midst of this chaos and fear. I don’t know either – but I feel that I must keep going.

    (Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/aug/19/rio-voices-view-from-the-favelas-olympics-they-
    promised-a-legacy-of-peace-but-brazil-is-now-at-war. Access on 22/8/2017)
    The author talks about the favelas before and after the Olympics. Regarding this, it is correct to say that
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 156ab8b3-fd
  • 1567AD52-FD

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    View from the Rio favelas: 'We're often scared to leave the house in case we're hit by a stray bullet'

    A year has gone by since the Olympic Games. Only 147 of those 365 days ended without the residents of Complexo do Alemão hearing gunshots. After the promises of hope and the Games’ legacy of peace, 218 days were accompanied by a soundtrack of gunfire.

    On 218 days we were afraid we wouldn’t make it home alive; we were scared to leave the house in case we were hit by a stray bullet; on 218 days we were afraid that the walls of our homes might be hit. To pretend that we were not in a war zone, the military police painted their armoured military tanks – popularly called caveirão, or “big skull” – white.

    For a long time I’ve wondered about the reason for the conflict and danger in the favelas of Rio, the same places that hold so much shared affection, culture, art and memory.

    Since the Olympics, residents of the Complexo do Alemão have been afraid of organising a cultural event in the neighbourhood square, or of people gathering outside because an intense shootout might happen without prior notice, with no chance to find protection. It has been 218 days of fear.

    All eyes – and investments – were turned to Brazil when it hosted, over 10 years, three mega sporting events. But the country has failed to keep its promises of peace after the 2007 Pan-American Games, the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympic Games.

    Before the Olympics, the state was completely absent in the favela. Back then we had no cable car – now we do, but it doesn’t work. We did not have family clinics – now we do, but without medical care. There were no police – now there are, and we live with daily shootings. What have the poorest received as a result of the Games? On television, I see only news of corruption.

    Brazil is at war, some say. A war on the poor, justified by drugs. A war that justifies, for many (but not for me) the presence of the Brazilian army in the streets of the city. The beauty of Rio’s natural landscapes contrasts with the conflict of our daily lives, militarised by the government.

    We need to talk about the relationship between violence and drugs. Young people from different favelas are now coming together to think about strategies that we hope can feed into public policies on drugs in Brazil. The #Movimentos movement – which runs discussions and seminars for young people – was created because it isn’t possible to deal with the drugs issue without the input of those who live with the consequences of failed policies. 

    As other countries move towards resolving the issue in a serious way, investing in research and prevention mechanisms in public health services, Brazil invests in more weapons and repression that result in an increase of death and incarceration – particularly among people who are poor, black, young and living in favelas.

    But despite all the fear, all the chaos, we continue to conquer the world, occupying the spaces that we have been historically denied. The Coletivo Papo Reto (Straight Talk Collective) has created a calendar that celebrates the good news and achievements of the people who live in Complexo do Alemão. Many people may not understand what it is that motivates us in the midst of this chaos and fear. I don’t know either – but I feel that I must keep going.

    (Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/aug/19/rio-voices-view-from-the-favelas-olympics-they-
    promised-a-legacy-of-peace-but-brazil-is-now-at-war. Access on 22/8/2017)
    According to the author, why did the military police paint their armoured military tanks?
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 1567ad52-fd
  • 15647B66-FD

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    UNICENTRO · 2017MédioEntre para guardar nos favoritos
    View from the Rio favelas: 'We're often scared to leave the house in case we're hit by a stray bullet'

    A year has gone by since the Olympic Games. Only 147 of those 365 days ended without the residents of Complexo do Alemão hearing gunshots. After the promises of hope and the Games’ legacy of peace, 218 days were accompanied by a soundtrack of gunfire.

    On 218 days we were afraid we wouldn’t make it home alive; we were scared to leave the house in case we were hit by a stray bullet; on 218 days we were afraid that the walls of our homes might be hit. To pretend that we were not in a war zone, the military police painted their armoured military tanks – popularly called caveirão, or “big skull” – white.

    For a long time I’ve wondered about the reason for the conflict and danger in the favelas of Rio, the same places that hold so much shared affection, culture, art and memory.

    Since the Olympics, residents of the Complexo do Alemão have been afraid of organising a cultural event in the neighbourhood square, or of people gathering outside because an intense shootout might happen without prior notice, with no chance to find protection. It has been 218 days of fear.

    All eyes – and investments – were turned to Brazil when it hosted, over 10 years, three mega sporting events. But the country has failed to keep its promises of peace after the 2007 Pan-American Games, the 2014 World Cup and the 2016 Olympic Games.

    Before the Olympics, the state was completely absent in the favela. Back then we had no cable car – now we do, but it doesn’t work. We did not have family clinics – now we do, but without medical care. There were no police – now there are, and we live with daily shootings. What have the poorest received as a result of the Games? On television, I see only news of corruption.

    Brazil is at war, some say. A war on the poor, justified by drugs. A war that justifies, for many (but not for me) the presence of the Brazilian army in the streets of the city. The beauty of Rio’s natural landscapes contrasts with the conflict of our daily lives, militarised by the government.

    We need to talk about the relationship between violence and drugs. Young people from different favelas are now coming together to think about strategies that we hope can feed into public policies on drugs in Brazil. The #Movimentos movement – which runs discussions and seminars for young people – was created because it isn’t possible to deal with the drugs issue without the input of those who live with the consequences of failed policies. 

    As other countries move towards resolving the issue in a serious way, investing in research and prevention mechanisms in public health services, Brazil invests in more weapons and repression that result in an increase of death and incarceration – particularly among people who are poor, black, young and living in favelas.

    But despite all the fear, all the chaos, we continue to conquer the world, occupying the spaces that we have been historically denied. The Coletivo Papo Reto (Straight Talk Collective) has created a calendar that celebrates the good news and achievements of the people who live in Complexo do Alemão. Many people may not understand what it is that motivates us in the midst of this chaos and fear. I don’t know either – but I feel that I must keep going.

    (Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/aug/19/rio-voices-view-from-the-favelas-olympics-they-
    promised-a-legacy-of-peace-but-brazil-is-now-at-war. Access on 22/8/2017)
    The main objective of the article is to
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 15647b66-fd
  • B891901E-FC

    Inglês

    Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension    PUC - RS · 2017DifícilEntre para guardar nos favoritos

    INSTRUÇÃO: Responder à questão com base no texto, que apresenta comentários de especialistas sobre o gráfico.


    Imagem da questão de Inglês, PUC - RS 2017, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension


    Comment 1 – (…) the proportion of the population living in their own home has gone into decline. It peaked around the middle of the last decade, at just over 70 per cent.

    Comment 2 – Owner occupiers spend an average of 18 per cent on their mortgage. That average may be misleading – those who’ve paid off their mortgage will be zilch. At least they’re building up an asset.

    Comment 3 – The proportion in council homes has fallen too, thanks largely to Right to Buy. As a result, the proportion renting their own home has more than doubled in the last two decades, from under 10 per cent to over 20.

    Comment 4 – (…) housing which costs more than 30 per cent of your income should count as unaffordable. This is a problem faced overwhelmingly by young renters.

    Comment 5 – Soon, the rates of the population living in their own home will be back under 60 per cent, for the first time since the mid 1980s.


    Adapted from: http://www.citymetric.com/politics/british-housing-crisis-five-charts


    Read these assertions.


    I. The word “living”, in the context of comment 1, plays the same grammatical function as in How do young people make a living in London?

    II. If the grammatical structure “may be misleading” (comment 2) were in reported speech, it would be: The expert said that average might mislead.

    III. By reading comment 3, one can say that some people who had the opportunity to buy their houses from the council are now renting them to others.

    IV. “(…) should count as unaffordable”. (comment 4) means are to be considered financially unfeasible.

    V. By reading comment 5, one can say that the population living in their own home did not reach 60 per cent in the mid 1980s.


    The correct assertions are only

    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão b891901e-fc