Until recently, the "science of the future" was supposed to be electronics and artificial intelligence. Today it seems more and more likely that the next great breakthroughs in technology will be brought through a combination of those two sciences with organic chemistry and genetic engineering. This combination is the science of biotechnology. Organic chemistry enables us to produce marvelous synthetic materials. However, it is still difficult to manufacture anything that has the capacity of wool to conserve   heat and also to absorb moisture. Nothing that we have been able to produce so far comes anywhere near the combination of strength, lightness and flexibility that we find in the bodies of ordinary insects. Nevertheless, scientists in the laboratory have already succeeded in "growing" a material that has many of the characteristics of human skin. The next step may well be "biotech hearts and eyes" which can replace diseased organs in human beings. These will not be rejected by the body, as is the case with organs from humans. The application of biotechnology to energy production seems even more promising. In 1996 the famous science fiction writer, Arthur C. Clarke, many of whose previous predictions have come true, said that we may soon be able to develop remarkably cheap and renewable sources of energy. Some of these power sources will be biological. Clarke and others have warned us repeatedly that sooner or later we will have to give up our dependence on non-renewable power sources. Coal, oil and gas are indeed convenient. However, using them also means creating dangerously high levels of pollution. It will be impossible to meet the growing demand for energy without increasing that pollution to catastrophic   levels unless we develop power sources that are both cheaper and cleaner. It is attempting to think that biotechnology or some other "science of the future" can solve our problems. Before we surrender to that temptation we should remember nuclear power. Only a few generations ago it seemed to promise limitless, cheap and safe energy. Today those promises lie buried in a concrete grave in a place called Chernobyl, in the Ukraine. Biotechnology is unlikely, however, to break its promises in quite the same or such a dangerous way. According to the passage, the science of the future is likely to be    _   .
electronics biotechnology genetic engineering nuclear technology
Question: Until recently, the "science of the future" was supposed to be electronics and artificial intelligence. Today it seems more and more likely that the next great breakthroughs in technology will be brought through a combination of those two sciences with organic chemistry and genetic engineering. This combination is the science of biotechnology. Organic chemistry enables us to produce marvelous synthetic materials. However, it is still difficult to manufacture anything that has the capacity of wool to conserve   heat and also to absorb moisture. Nothing that we have been able to produce so far comes anywhere near the combination of strength, lightness and flexibility that we find in the bodies of ordinary insects. Nevertheless, scientists in the laboratory have already succeeded in "growing" a material that has many of the characteristics of human skin. The next step may well be "biotech hearts and eyes" which can replace diseased organs in human beings. These will not be rejected by the body, as is the case with organs from humans. The application of biotechnology to energy production seems even more promising. In 1996 the famous science fiction writer, Arthur C. Clarke, many of whose previous predictions have come true, said that we may soon be able to develop remarkably cheap and renewable sources of energy. Some of these power sources will be biological. Clarke and others have warned us repeatedly that sooner or later we will have to give up our dependence on non-renewable power sources. Coal, oil and gas are indeed convenient. However, using them also means creating dangerously high levels of pollution. It will be impossible to meet the growing demand for energy without increasing that pollution to catastrophic   levels unless we develop power sources that are both cheaper and cleaner. It is attempting to think that biotechnology or some other "science of the future" can solve our problems. Before we surrender to that temptation we should remember nuclear power. Only a few generations ago it seemed to promise limitless, cheap and safe energy. Today those promises lie buried in a concrete grave in a place called Chernobyl, in the Ukraine. Biotechnology is unlikely, however, to break its promises in quite the same or such a dangerous way. According to the passage, the science of the future is likely to be    _   .
A. electronics
B. biotechnology
C. genetic engineering
D. nuclear technology
Answer: