People want action on noise, a recent public meeting in Brisbane showed. Some want technical improvements such as quieter air conditioners or better sound barriers around major roads. Others want tougher laws to restrict noise from building sites or to require owners to take responsibility for barking dogs. But the highest priority was a noise complaints system that works.
Brisbane City Council receives more complaints about noise than all other problems put together. So it conducted a survey and found that about half its residents are upset by noise in one form or another –traffic, mowers, pool pumps, air conditioners or loud parties. This inspired the Council to bring together more than 100 citizens one evening to talk through a range of options.
The meeting found the present regulatory system bizarre. Depending on the problem, responsibility for noise can lie with the Council, the Environment Protection Authority, one of three government departments or even the police. So complainants often feel they are getting the run-round. When the people at the forum were asked to vote for changes, the strongest response was for a 24-hour noise hotline to be the first port of call for all complaints.
The forum also favored regulatory measures, such as tougher minimum standards for noise in appliances like air conditioners. This even makes economic sense, as noise is a waste of energy and money. Other measures the meeting supported were wider buffer (缓冲) zones around noisy activities and controls to keep heavy traffic away from residential areas.
But there are obvious conflicts. Many people like to have a bar within walking distance if they feel like a drink, but they don’t want a noisy pub keeping them awake when they want an early night. Most people want to live near a major road providing good access to other parts of the city, but they don't’ want the problem of road noise.
I was most interested by the proposals aimed at behavioral change. There was strong support for measures to reduce traffic: better public transport, cycleways and footpaths, even charges for road use. Many people optimistically thought industry awards for better equipment would stimulate the production of quieter appliances. It was even suggested that noise from building sites could be alleviated (减轻) if Brisbane adopted daylight saving, thus shifting the working day and providing longer, quieter evenings.
46. According to the recent public meeting in Brisbane, what was the first step to take in order to reduce noise pollution?

A．Produce quieter air conditioners.

B．Provide better sound barriers around major roads.

C．Establish a noise complaints system.

D．Make stricter laws to require owners to take responsibility for barking dogs.

47. It can be inferred from the passage that _______.

A．the Brisbane residents were satisfied with the present noise regulatory system

B．many people in Brisbane preferred to live near a pub to which they have easy access

C．nearly all the inhabitants in Brisbane were bothered by noise in one form or another

D．noise pollution is the most serious among pollution complaints in Brisbane

48. What does the word “run-round” (Para. 3) mean?

A．Unfair treatment.	B．Quick response.
C．Delaying action in response to a request.	D．Full attention.

49. How could noise from building sites be alleviated if Brisbane adopted daylight saving?

A．If daylight saving was adopted, the daytime would be prolonged and the night would become quieter.

B．If daylight saving was adopted, the working hours during the daytime would be shortened while the night would be extended and thus quieter.

C．If daylight saving was adopted, the night would be shortened and thus quieter.

D．If daylight saving was adopted, both the daytime and the night would be shortened and the noise would be reduced.

50. What was the author’s attitude towards the industry awards for quieter equipment?

A．Suspicious.

B．Positive.

C．Enthusiastic.

D．Indifferent.