英検準1級の水資源・水不足の長文【無料3題15問】｜貯水池・漏水・飲料水検査と全解説

英検準1級の水資源・水不足の長文では、「水が減った理由」「測定した値」「そこから判断できること」を区別することが重要です。慶英会独自の貯水池・配水管の漏水・飲料水検査の3長文と内容一致15問を無料公開します。段落別日本語内容、重要語彙、正解の本文根拠、英文要約模範まで掲載しています。

日本英語検定協会が案内する準1級の長文内容一致は7問、長文空所補充は6問です。本記事の3長文15問は学習量を増やすため慶英会が独自制作した教材であり、公式過去問ではありません。登場する自治体・数値・検査結果はすべて架空です。試験形式は英検協会公式で確認できます。

結論｜水資源の長文で確認する5つの視点

• 水不足の原因を一つに決めつけない
• 貯水量、漏水の警告、飲料水の検査結果は異なる指標
• 家庭・農業・事業者の必要と負担を分ける
• 試行と恒久的な政策を区別する
• may・might・not necessarilyを強い断定へ書き換えない

演習の進め方

英文を先に読み、各題5問の4択に答えてから本文の根拠を探します。正答だけでなく、間違いの選択肢が「全員」「必ず」「原因は一つ」といった過度の断定を加えていないか確認してください。最後に英文要約を自分で作成し、慶英会の模範と比較します。

長文1｜貯水池の水不足と住民・農家の利害（約190語）

英文・第1段落

In the fictional town of Bellford, two unusually dry summers lowered the level of a reservoir serving households, farms, and small factories. The council proposed restrictions on washing cars and watering decorative gardens. Farmers worried that unpredictable limits could interfere with planting, while factory owners warned that sudden interruptions could affect employees. Officials therefore invited each group to describe its needs instead of assuming that the largest customer should automatically receive the highest priority.

英文・第2段落

Engineers compared rainfall, water demand, and possible losses from aging pipes. They explained that a low reservoir level could have several causes, including evaporation, leaks, and increased use. At public meetings, some residents also pointed out that outdoor water was essential for certain activities, not always recreational. The town published examples and a way for households to request exceptions. It also accepted written comments from people unable to attend meetings.

英文・第3段落

After six weeks, consumption had fallen, but rain had briefly returned during the same period. The council refused to claim that restrictions alone explained the change. It planned further monitoring and a review of effects on food production, households, and local employment before approving permanent rules.

独自4択・内容一致5問

Q1. Why did the council ask different groups about their needs?

1. To ban every factory.
2. Because water users faced different consequences.
3. To guarantee more rainfall.
4. Because all customers used identical amounts.

Q2. What could contribute to declining water levels?

1. Only increased factory production.
2. Only the water restrictions.
3. Evaporation, leaks, and higher demand.
4. Only outdoor gardening.

Q3. Why did the town allow exceptions?

1. Some outdoor activities were necessary.
2. Every use was recreational.
3. All farmers were exempt automatically.
4. Only business owners were allowed to speak.

Q4. Why was the first decline in consumption hard to explain?

1. There were no measurements.
2. All restrictions had been lifted.
3. Factory demand remained constant.
4. Rain had also returned briefly.

Q5. What was the recommended next step?

1. Immediately adopt permanent rules.
2. Continue monitoring before a lasting policy.
3. Give all water to the largest user.
4. End all written consultation.

段落別の日本語解説

第1段落：架空のBellford町では乾燥した夏が続き、家庭・農地・工場へ水を供給する貯水池の水位が下がった。洗車や観賞用の庭への散水の制限が提案されたが、農家は栽培計画への影響を、企業は雇用への影響を懸念した。

第2段落：技術者は雨量、需要、古い配管の漏水などを比較した。水位低下は一つの原因だけでは説明できず、屋外での水使用も人によっては必要な活動である。例外申請と書面意見の手順も設けられた。

第3段落：6週間後、水使用量は下がったが同時期に雨も降ったため、制限だけの効果とは断定しなかった。恒久策を決める前に家庭・農業・雇用への影響を追加調査する。

重要語彙

• reservoir：貯水池
• scarcity：不足
• evaporation：蒸発
• exemption：例外・免除

全5問の正解・本文根拠・誤答の分析

Q1 正解B：Because water users faced different consequences.。英文根拠：invited each group to describe its needs。解説：利用者の事情が異なるため。

Q2 正解C：Evaporation, leaks, and higher demand.。英文根拠：evaporation, leaks, and increased use。解説：複数の原因を挙げている。

Q3 正解A：Some outdoor activities were necessary.。英文根拠：outdoor water was essential for certain activities。解説：屋外での利用でも不可欠な場合がある。

Q4 正解D：Rain had also returned briefly.。英文根拠：rain had briefly returned。解説：別の要因が同時にあった。

Q5 正解B：Continue monitoring before a lasting policy.。英文根拠：planned further monitoring … before … permanent rules。解説：追加検証が結論。

英文要約の独自模範（60語）

A town with declining reservoir levels proposed restrictions on some outdoor water uses. Households, farmers, and factories expressed different needs, while engineers identified rainfall, leaks, and demand as possible factors. Consumption later decreased, but a return of rain complicated the interpretation. Officials therefore planned further monitoring and consultation before establishing permanent rules that could affect food production, employment, and residents.

長文2｜水道管の漏水センサーと現地確認（約204語）

英文・第1段落

In fictional Northmere, a water company suspected that old pipes were losing treated water before it reached customers. Replacing every pipe would be expensive and disruptive, so engineers tested pressure sensors to identify locations needing inspection. They warned that unusual readings were not proof of a leak because pressure could also change when demand increased suddenly.

英文・第2段落

Workers compared the signals with maintenance records and visited selected streets. At two locations they found damaged connections. At a third, the unusual reading reflected heavy use by a nearby building rather than broken pipes. Residents welcomed efforts to reduce losses but worried that repairs would close roads and affect local businesses. The company explained that the number of warnings did not necessarily indicate how serious the damage was. The importance of each pipe and the reliability of its readings also mattered.

英文・第3段落

After several months, the utility repaired confirmed faults and created a schedule for future inspections. It did not announce a precise amount of water saved by the new sensors because it lacked a reliable comparison with conditions without them. Officials also considered coordinating repairs with other roadwork. The trial showed how technology can guide decisions while still requiring physical checks and careful evaluation of public costs.

独自4択・内容一致5問

Q6. Why did engineers test sensors first?

1. All pipes were known to be new.
2. Replacing every pipe would be costly and disruptive.
3. Roads had already closed.
4. Sensors could repair damage by themselves.

Q7. Why could an unusual pressure reading be misleading?

1. Pressure never changes.
2. All warnings were false.
3. High demand could also change pressure.
4. No readings could be recorded.

Q8. What was found at the third location?

1. Heavy use rather than a damaged pipe.
2. A new reservoir.
3. No buildings.
4. A permanently closed street.

Q9. What couldn’t the utility immediately calculate?

1. The number of roads.
2. The age of the city.
3. How many sites had been checked.
4. The water savings attributable to sensors.

Q10. What is the main lesson?

1. Sensor alerts replace all inspections.
2. Technology helps direct checks but does not replace verification.
3. Road disruption never matters.
4. Every warning is equally serious.

段落別の日本語解説

第1段落：架空のNorthmere市の水道事業者は古い管から漏水している可能性を考えた。全配管の一括交換は高額で住民の生活にも影響するため圧力センサーを試した。ただし圧力の異常は水道使用量の急増でも起きるため、破損が確定した意味ではない。

第2段落：点検したうち二地点には実際の破損があったが、別の地点では建物の大量使用が原因だった。住民は漏水削減を期待する一方、工事による通行への支障も心配した。警告件数だけで深刻さを判断できず、管の重要性も考慮した。

第3段落：確認できた故障を修理したものの、センサー導入によってどれだけ水が節約されたかは確定できなかった。導入がない場合との比較が不足しており、他の道路工事と連携して不便を減らすことも検討した。

重要語彙

• leak：漏れ・漏水
• pressure sensor：圧力センサー
• treated water：浄水処理された水
• utility：公共インフラ事業者

全5問の正解・本文根拠・誤答の分析

Q6 正解B：Replacing every pipe would be costly and disruptive.。英文根拠：Replacing every pipe would be expensive and disruptive。解説：まず調査して修理対象を絞るため。

Q7 正解C：High demand could also change pressure.。英文根拠：pressure could also change when demand increased。解説：漏水以外の原因がある。

Q8 正解A：Heavy use rather than a damaged pipe.。英文根拠：heavy use … rather than broken pipes。解説：現地確認で別要因が判明。

Q9 正解D：The water savings attributable to sensors.。英文根拠：did not announce a precise amount of water saved。解説：導入による節水の因果を計測できない。

Q10 正解B：Technology helps direct checks but does not replace verification.。英文根拠：requiring physical checks and careful evaluation。解説：技術と現地確認を組み合わせる。

英文要約の独自模範（62語）

A water company tested pressure sensors to identify possible leaks in aging pipes. Engineers cautioned that changes in demand could also cause unusual readings. Inspections confirmed damage at some locations but found a different cause elsewhere. The utility repaired confirmed faults without claiming precise water savings from sensors alone. It also considered construction disruption and planned further checks before replacing additional pipes.

長文3｜井戸水の検査と結果の伝え方（約201語）

英文・第1段落

A fictional rural district used several small wells for drinking water. After unusual weather, residents worried that some wells required additional tests. Volunteers proposed simple home kits, but a specialist explained that these could detect only selected substances. A negative result on one kit could not prove that water was free from every possible risk. The district therefore worked with a qualified laboratory to select appropriate tests.

英文・第2段落

Staff collected samples from wells in different locations and recorded dates and methods. Residents wondered why the same well sometimes produced different readings. The specialist explained that rainfall, sampling practices, and natural variation could affect results. She also advised officials not to publish technical numbers without explanations. Since several households had limited internet access, paper summaries and meetings were arranged to make the findings easier to understand.

英文・第3段落

When the results arrived, a few wells required further investigation. The laboratory did not conclude that all water in the district was unsafe. Officials planned follow-up testing and temporary guidance where necessary, relying on qualified specialists for decisions about safety. They agreed to publish the limits of each test alongside the findings. Trust, the district concluded, depended on explaining what the evidence did and did not establish.

独自4択・内容一致5問

Q11. What was the limitation of the home kits?

1. They could establish universal safety.
2. They measured every substance.
3. They covered only selected substances.
4. They could not be used near wells.

Q12. Why might results from the same well vary?

1. Sampling conditions and rainfall could differ.
2. Every sample was imaginary.
3. The district had no laboratory.
4. Every well had been sealed.

Q13. How did officials reach residents with limited internet?

1. They stopped publishing results.
2. They used paper summaries and meetings.
3. They required smartphones.
4. They shared only unexplained numbers online.

Q14. What did the laboratory conclude?

1. Every well was unsafe.
2. No follow-up was needed.
3. Every household must move.
4. Only some wells required further investigation.

Q15. What principle guided the district?

1. Test results should never be explained.
2. A negative kit guarantees universal safety.
3. Findings need clear explanations of limits.
4. Residents should never ask questions.

段落別の日本語解説

第1段落：架空の農村地区では複数の井戸が飲料水に使われていた。異常気象の後、検査キットの活用が提案されたが、簡易検査で調べられる物質は限られる。陰性の結果一つではすべての危険がないと証明できないため、専門機関での適切な検査も行った。

第2段落：井戸からの採水方法と日付を記録した。同じ井戸でも雨量・採水法・自然変動で結果が変わり得る。専門的な数値を説明なしで公開せず、ネットが使えない家庭向けに紙の資料と説明会も用意した。

第3段落：追加調査が必要な井戸は一部だったが、地域全体の水が危険だという結論にはならなかった。専門家による安全判断、追跡検査、必要な暫定案内を準備し、何が判明し何が未確認かを明確に伝える方針をとった。

重要語彙

• well：井戸
• drinking water：飲料水
• sampling：試料採取
• laboratory：検査機関

全5問の正解・本文根拠・誤答の分析

Q11 正解C：They covered only selected substances.。英文根拠：detect only selected substances。解説：測定範囲が限定される。

Q12 正解A：Sampling conditions and rainfall could differ.。英文根拠：rainfall, sampling practices, and natural variation。解説：測定条件による。

Q13 正解B：They used paper summaries and meetings.。英文根拠：paper summaries and meetings were arranged。解説：異なる情報アクセスの必要。

Q14 正解D：Only some wells required further investigation.。英文根拠：a few wells required further investigation … not … all。解説：一部の結果を全域へ拡大しない。

Q15 正解C：Findings need clear explanations of limits.。英文根拠：publish the limits of each test alongside the findings。解説：結果と限界を併記する。

英文要約の独自模範（64語）

A rural district investigated well-water safety after unusual weather. Volunteers proposed home kits, but specialists explained that the kits could test only selected substances. Laboratory samples sometimes varied with weather and collection methods, so results needed careful interpretation. A few wells required follow-up investigation, not a declaration that all water was unsafe. Officials shared explanations through paper notices and meetings to support informed decisions.

テーマ横断の復習ポイント

貯水池は雨量と使用制限、配水管はセンサーの警告と破損の確認、井戸水は検査項目と全体の安全をそれぞれ区別します。英検準1級では、「本文にある事実」と「資料から推測できる範囲」を変えずに読むことが正解への近道です。

7日間の復習

1. 1日目：3長文15問を初見で解く
2. 2日目：すべての設問の根拠を本文で確認する
3. 3日目：water allocationなどの重要語彙を例文にする
4. 4日目：誤答の断定表現を書き直す
5. 5日目：各長文を英語3文に要約する
6. 6日目：模範と比較し、重要な制約が抜けていないか確認する
7. 7日目：英検公式過去問の科学・環境長文へ応用する

FAQ

実際の水道の安全性を確認する記事ですか？

いいえ。学習用の架空設定です。実際の飲料水については水道事業者や自治体、専門機関の公表情報を確認してください。

この15問で準1級のCSEを換算できますか？

できません。慶英会の独自問題であり、協会の問題数・採点方式とは異なります。

専門知識がなくても長文を解けますか？

本文にある観測・原因・制約の説明を根拠に判断しましょう。本文に書いていないデータや結論を補う必要はありません。

次に進む無料教材と慶英会の学習相談

環境・エネルギー長文3題15問／食料・農業長文3題15問／科学・医療長文3題15問。

慶英会では中高一貫校の授業と英検準1級の長文・要約を結びつけ、構文・語彙・本文の根拠を個別に確認します。最大1か月完全無料体験・学習相談はこちら。

公式情報

日本英語検定協会・準1級の試験内容（2026年10月28日確認）。英文、設問、解答はすべて慶英会の独自制作です。