[解析]
(1)细节理解题。根据第一段But Tim Searchinger at Princeton University says many of these studies are based on the false foundation that harvesting wood is carbon neutral (碳中和). (但普林斯顿大学的Tim Searchinger表示,这些研究中的许多都是基于一个错误的基础,即采伐木材是碳中和的。)可知,许多这样的研究都基于一个错误的概念,即采伐木材就是碳中和。故选B。
(2)段落大意题。根据第二段In a report for the World Resources Institute,Searchinger and his colleagues have modelled how using more wood for construction would affect emissions between 2010 and 2050,accounting for the emissions from harvesting the wood.They considered various types of forests and parts of wood going towards construction.They also factored in the emissions savings from replacing concrete and steel.(在世界资源研究所的一份报告中,Searchinger和他的同事们模拟了2010年至2050年间,使用更多的木材进行建筑将如何影响排放,并考虑到了砍伐木材的排放量。他们考虑了各种类型的森林和用于建筑的部分木材。他们还考虑到了更换混凝土和钢材所节省的排放量。)可知,第二段主要介绍新研究的过程。A.The process of the new research.(新研究的过程。)符合文意,故选A。
(3)细节理解题。根据第三段Under some circumstances,the researchers found significant emissions reductions.But each case required what they considered an unrealistically high portion of the wood going towards construction,as well as rapid growth only seen in warmer places,like Brazil.(在某些情况下,研究人员发现了显著的减排。但每一种情况都需要他们认为不切实际的高比例木材用于建筑,以及只有在巴西等温暖地区才能看到的快速增长。)可知,用木材建造建筑会导致碳排放量显著减少,只是前提条件比较苛刻。故选C。
(4)观点态度题。根据最后一段Ali Amiri at Aalto University in Finland says the report's conclusions about emissions from rising demand are probably correct,but the story is different for wood we already harvest. "Boosting the efficiency of current harvests and using more wood for longer lived purposes than paper would cut emissions," he says. "We cannot just say we should stop using wood."(芬兰阿尔托大学的阿里•阿梅里说,该报告关于需求增长导致的排放的结论可能是正确的,但我们已经收获的木材的情况不同。他说,提高当前收成的效率并将更多的木材用于比纸张更长久的用途将减少排放。我们不能只是说我们应该停止使用木材。)可知,Ali Amiri对此研究结果有一定的肯定性,但是他又表示我们不能说我们就应该停止使用木材。故他对此研究结果从正反两方面都进行了说明,其态度是客观公正的。A.Favorable赞同的;B.Doubtful怀疑的;C.Critical批评的;D.Objective客观的。故选D。