您现在的位置: 方向标英语网 >> 教育资讯 >> 教育新闻 >> 文章正文
英语搜索:
 
 最新英语            more>>
 推荐英语            more>>
 热门英语            more>>

环球瞭望:哥本哈根峰会能否成功?

作者:O    文章来源:0    点击数:    更新时间:2009-12-5 【我来说两句

The Copenhagen summit on climate change is going to fall short. Does this matter? Yes and no: yes, because the case for action is so strong; no, because the likely agreement would be inadequate. Tackling climate change will be hard. It is crucial that we achieve the goal effectively and efficiently. The likely further delays should be used to achieve just that.
  哥本哈根气候变化峰会将无法达成目标。这要紧吗?既要紧也不要紧:说要紧,是因为采取行动的理由极其充分;说不要紧,是因为可能达成的协议将不足以解决问题。应对气候变化将是一项艰巨的工作。我们必须有效且高效地达成目标。可能出现的进一步拖延,就应该用于实现这一目标。

  My view that decisive action is justified is contentious. Sceptics offer two counter-arguments: first, that the science underlying climate change is highly uncertain; second, that costs exceed benefits.
  我认为有必要采取果断行动的观点引起了争议。怀疑论者提出了两点反驳意见:首先,作为气候变化依据的科学存在高度不确定性;其次,成本大于收益。

  Yet it is not enough to argue that the science is uncertain. Given the risks, we have to be quite sure the science is wrong before following the sceptics. By the time we know it is not, it is likely to be too late to act effectively. We cannot repeat experiments with just one planet.
  但仅仅争辩科学具有不确定性是不够的。鉴于存在的风险,在听信怀疑论者之前,我们必须确信科学是错误的。等到我们发现它没有错,再要采取有效行动,可能就为时已晚了。我们只有一个地球,无法重复进行实验。

  Fortunately, the evidence suggests that the costs of action should not be prohibitive. The World Bank's latest World Development Report argues that the costs of tighter restrictions on emissions would be modest. On the benefit side, I would stress the importance of avoiding the danger of a climate catastrophe. We do not have a right to take such risks.
  值得庆幸的是,证据表明,行动的成本应该不至于令人望而却步。世界银行(World Bank)最新发布的《世界发展报告》(World Development Report)提出,实施更严格排放限制的成本不会很高。就收益方面,我想强调避免气候灾难危险的重要性。我们没有权利冒这样的风险。

  Nevertheless, sceptics perform an invaluable service. They remind us to keep monitoring actual climate developments. They tell us, too, that action has costs and some costs – leaving billions of people in poverty – would be intolerable. Fortunately, as the World Bank notes, poor people emit little. The reductions in emissions secured by switching the US fleet of sport utility vehicles into cars with European Union fuel economy standards would cover the emissions from providing electricity to 1.6bn people now without access.
  不过,怀疑论者发挥着宝贵作用。他们提醒我们要不断监测气候的实际变化。他们还告诉我们,行动是要付出成本的,而有些成本——令数十亿人陷入贫困——是无法容忍的。值得庆幸的是,正如世行所指出的那样,贫困人群的排放量很小。只要把美国的大批运动型多功能车(SUV)替换为符合欧盟燃油经济性标准的轿车,所实现的减排量就足以覆盖为迄今用不上电的16亿人供电所需的排放量。

  While action is justified and probably not prohibitively expensive, it is going to be a huge challenge. As the International Energy Agency points out in its World Energy Outlook, we would need to “decarbonise” growth to limit atmospheric concentrations of “CO2 equivalent” to 450 parts per million, the level believed consistent with a global average temperature increase of about 2°C. We would need to do everything – reduce demand, expand renewables, invest in nuclear power, develop carbon capture and storage, switch from coal to gas and protect forests – to achieve this. (See charts.)
  虽然有理由采取行动,成本可能也不是高得吓人,但它仍将是一项艰巨挑战。正如国际能源机构(IEA)在其《世界能源展望》(World Energy Outlook)中所指出的那样,我们必须对增长进行“去碳化”,把大气中的二氧化碳当量浓度控制在450ppm(百万分之450)以下——人们认为,这一浓度对应着全球平均气温上升大约2摄氏度。我们必须竭尽所能来实现这一目标(见表格),包括降低需求,开发可再生能源,投资核能,发展碳捕捉和储存技术,从用煤转向用气,保护森林。

 

[1] [2] [3] 下一页

已有很多网友发表了看法,点击参与讨论】【对英语不懂,点击提问】【英语论坛】【返回首页

  • 上一篇文章:
  • 下一篇文章: 没有了
  •  英语图片文章                                          more>>