The discussion on renewable energy has been going on for at least a decade and people have relied on fossil fuels almost entirely for more than a century. However, the situation when fossil fuels were the most efficient and the cheapest source of energy has been left far in the past. Many countries such as Germany and Sweden have already made significant efforts to fix this situation, employing numerous power plants working on the renewable resources of energy. The most effective among these resources is geothermal（地热的）energy.

    Geothermal energy does not depend on the world's economic and political situation as strongly as fossil fuels do. Besides, extracting（提炼）fossil fuels adds to the price of energy produced from them. Therefore, geothermal energy is much cheaper than traditional ones, saving up to 80% of the costs over fossil fuels.

    Being a renewable resource, geothermal energy produces less waste and pollution than traditional energy sources. In geothermal systems, carbon dioxide makes up about 10% of air produced. Overall, in order to produce the electricity that can be used for one hour, the geothermal systems produce 0.1 pound of carbon dioxide and other harmful gases. For a comparison, a power plant producing from gas produces up to 2 pounds of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, and those power plants that work on coal（煤）produce an astonishing 3.6 pounds of greenhouse gases.

    Low costs is another reason why using geothermal power plants should be the first choice for many countries. Geothermal heat systems require 25% to 50% less energy for work compared with the traditional systems for heating or cooling. Besides, geothermal equipment is less big: due to the very nature of geothermal energy, geothermal power plants have only a few moving parts, all of which can be easily sheltered inside a relatively small building. What's more, the life span of geothermal equipment is rather long. All these make geothermal power stations easy to build and keep.

    I was a very lucky girl.Many girls didn't know they could take part in or even be good at sports,but I never needed to be told that because I grew up with my grandmother who was a great Olympian.Even today,many girls need that extra nod in sports,but where can they get it?

    Cosmo Books Ltd.,                         14, Woodman Road,

    Hertford Estate,                            Two Bridges,

    Rickmansworth,                            West Sussex.

    Middx.                                  25^th February

Dear Sir,

    Just over six months ago, I saw an advertisement in the Morning Mail for a set of the complete works of William Shakespeare. Your company, Cosmo books Ltd., offered this set (eight books of plays and two books of poetry) at what was claimed to be a 'remarkable' price: fifteen pounds and fifty pence, including postage and packing. I had wanted a set of Shakespeare's plays and poems for some time, and these books, in red imitation leather, looked particularly attractive; so I sent for them.

    Two weeks later, the books arrived, together with a set of the complete works of Charles Dickens which I had not ordered. So I returned the Dickens books to you, with a cheque for fifteen pounds and fifty pence for the works of Shakespeare. Two more weeks passed. Then there arrived on my door step a second set of the works of Shakespeare, the same set of novels by Dickens and a six book set of the plays of Moliere, in French. Since I do not read French, these were of no use to me at all. However, I could not afford to post all these books back to you, so I wrote to you at the end of August of last year, instructing you to come and collect all the books that I did not want, and asking you not to send any other books until further notice.

    You did not reply to that letter. Instead you sent me a bill for forty two pounds, and a set of the plays of Schiller, in German. Since then, a new set of books has arrived every two weeks, the works of Goethe, the poems of Milton, the plays of Strindberg; I hardly know what I have. The books are still all in their boxes, in the garage, and my car has to stand in the rain outside.

    I have no room for any more books, and even if I read from now until the Last Judgment, I should not finish reading all the books that you have sent me.

    Please send no more books, send no more bills, send no more angry letters demanding payment. Just send one large lorry and take all the books away, leaving me only with the one set of the complete works of Shakespeare for which I have paid.

Yours faithfully,

SIMON WALKER

    Everything has its root. “Holiday”, is no exception. The origin of “holiday” is easy to see, coming from “holy day”, a day of particular religious significance, often celebrating the life of a saint (圣徒), during which no work was to be done. As far back as the 11th century, “holidays”, especially the major feast days, were times of “celebration and amusement”, as the Oxford English Dictionary puts it.

    The number of holidays steadily increased during the Middle Ages, until a medieval Englishman would have had the luxury of 40 to 50 days a year off work, depending on where he lived, in addition to a free day on Sundays.

    During the Reformation, Henry VIII abolished most of the holidays partly because of the Protestant (新教徒的) suspicion of saints, but more practically, because, according to historian Eamon Duffy, “A large number of holidays were making the people poor by limiting agriculture.” The people took a different view and organized a protest march—the Pilgrimage of Grace—partly to protect their days off.

    Though at first the religious and festive senses of holiday were combined, the word gradually came to be used for any kind of relaxing break from work. As the word was drawing away from a religious society, the number of authorized holidays was reduced, until by 1834 most workers had only four official days off a year, in addition to Sundays. Many factory workers amplified this time by staying home on “Saint Monday” to recover from what they had gotten up to the day before.

    By the late 19th century, employers were compromising and offering half-day Saturdays, the beginning of the “weekend”, a term first used in 1879. In 1908, an innovative mill in New England gave its employees all of Saturday off, and the practice of their getting the whole Saturday off spread widely during the Great Depression as a way to keep employment up. It took 400 years, but finally workers could enjoy as many holidays as they had in the 15th century.

    Americans gave nearly $300 billion away last year. Do you know the reason? Beyond the noble goals of helping others, it is that giving will make them happier.

    It is a fact that givers are happier people than non-givers. According to the Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey, a survey of 30,000 American households, people who give money to charity are 43% more likely than non-givers to say they are "very happy" about their lives. Similarly, volunteers are 42% more likely to be very happy then non-volunteers.

    The happiness difference between givers and non-givers is not due to differences in their personal characteristics, such as income or religion. Imagine two people who are identical in terms of income and faith, as well as age, education, politics, sex, and family circumstances, but one donates money and volunteers, while the other does not. The giver will be, on average, over 40 percentage points more likely to be very happy than the non-givers.

    A number of studies have researched exactly why charity leads to happiness. The surprising conclusion is that giving affects our brain chemistry. For example, people who give often report feelings of euphoria, which psychologists have referred to as the "Helper's High". They believe that charitable activity produces a very mild version of the sensations people get from drugs like morphine and heroin.

    Of course, not only does giving increase our happiness, but also our happiness increases the possibility that we will give. Everyone prefers to give more when they are happy. Researchers have investigated this by conducting experiments in which people are asked about their happiness before and after they participate in a charitable activity, such as volunteering to help children or serving meals to the poor. The result is clear that giving has a strong, positive causal impact on our happiness, so does happiness on giving