氣候變化

　　2023復習正是強化復習階段，在考研英語中占了40分，所以考研英語閱讀是英語科目中重要的一項。名師老師曾建議過考研生需要堅持每天泛讀10-15分鐘的英文原刊。強烈推薦了雜志《經濟學人》.雜志中的文章也是考研英語的主要材料來源.希望考研考生認真閱讀，快速提高考研英語閱讀水平。 　　Climate change 　　氣候變化 　　In praise of second best 　　次好方案獲認可 　　A carbon price would be better, but Barack Obama splan to cut emissions from power plants is welcome 　　為碳排放定價顯然更為理想，但奧巴馬的電廠減排方案依然備受歡迎。 　　NOTHING is too good for the United States Congress. The Capitol even has its own powerstation. The Capitol Power Plant in south-east Washington is still puffing away, though it wasbuilt in 1910making it older than most museums of powerand even though it has notgenerated any electricity since 1951. It pipes steam and chilled water to heat or cool thenation s legislators, and in the process it pumps out over 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide ayear. In 2000, when the administrator of the plant tried to switch it over from burning coalto natural gas to cut that pollution, senators from coal-producing states ganged up to stophim. The plant symbolises everything that is wrong with America s power sector and thepolicies that influence it. 　　這對美國國會來說不是什么好事。國會甚至擁有自己的電站。位于華盛頓東南部的國會電力工廠建于1910年，歷史比大多數電力博物館還悠久。雖然這家電廠自從1951年后就不再發電，卻還在造成污染。電廠通過管道輸送蒸汽和冷凍水來為立法者們取暖納涼，在這個過程中，電廠每年會排放超過100,000噸二氧化碳。2000年，電廠管理者試圖將原來的燃料煤換成天然氣，來減少污染。但是，生產煤的各州議員卻聯合抗議。了解此電廠，可知道美國電力部門出現的問題以及影響電力部門的各項政策。 　　So President Barack Obama s proposal on June 2nd to cut CO2 emissions from power plantsis welcome. Power stations are the single biggest source of greenhouse-gas emissions inAmerica, accounting for a third of the total. The plan to cut them by 30% from their 2005level by 2030 is the biggest step an American president has taken to curb climate change forseveral decades. 　　因此，6月2號，奧巴馬總統提出減少電廠二氧化碳排放量的提議備受歡迎。電廠是美國溫室氣體排放量的最大來源，排放量約占總排放量的三分之一。根據提議，到2030年，溫室氣體排放量需在2005年的水平上下降30%。這是幾十年來，美國總統在遏制氣候變化上邁出的最大一步。 　　The proposal matters for political reasons: several states which Democrats must win if theyare to keep control of the Senate are also coal producers, where anything that hurts minersis unpopular. So the plan probably increases the chance that Republicans will recapture theupper chamber of Congress in November. It also matters because of an internationaltimetable: countries are negotiating a treaty to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions globallywhich can be signed at the end of 2023. The president s proposal makes it more likely thatsome such deal will see the light of day. 　　從政治的角度，這項提議很重要：為了守住議會的席位，民主黨必須要爭取幾個生產煤的州的支持，在這些州，有損礦主利益的行為不受待見。所以，這項提議很可能增加共和黨于11月重獲國會上議院席位的幾率。從國際上看，這項提議也很重要：各國將要商定一項在全球范圍內減少溫室氣體排放量的條約，并可能于2023年底簽署。奧巴馬的提議使得類似協議有了一絲曙光。 　　Because of these implications, the plan has been greeted in America with wild partisanship.The left welcomes it as a decisive step away from fossil fuels. The right condemns it as anew tax on American companies and consumers which will only help China, where pollutionwill rise further, negating any benefit to the climate. Both views are exaggerated. Thetruth is that the proposal won t save the planet, but it will bring about small improvementsthat are worth having. 　　因為上述原因，美國國內對此項提議態度分立。左派贊成，認為這是減少化石燃料決定性的一步。右派則指責，這只會加重美國企業和消費者的稅賦負擔，而得益于中國。中國人口不斷上漲，這會抵消此項提議帶來的利益。雙方的觀點都被夸大了。事實是，這項提議不會拯救地球，但是，它依然能帶來意義非凡的些許進步。 　　Satisfyingly mediocre 　　令人滿意的平庸方案 　　Assuming the plan is carried out, it would reduce total American carbon emissions by around5%. That is a lot for one measure, though tiny compared with the overall cuts required torein in climate change. American power plants have already reduced their emissions by 15%since 2005, so requiring them to cut the same amount over a longer period is not tooarduous. The plan will raise electricity prices and kill some jobs, but it will also save lives,most immediately by cutting particulate pollution. 　　假設這項提議得以實施，美國的碳排放量會減少約5%。雖然對于應對氣候變化所要求的總排放量這還不夠，但對于這一具體措施，已然進步巨大。自2005年以來，美國的電廠已經將溫室氣體排放量減少了15%，因此，在更長時間期限內減少等量氣體排放應該是可行的。這項提議會提高電費，減少部分工作，但也因減少了粒狀物污染拯救了部分生命。 　　It is far from the best policy. Ideally, Congress would have passed a carbon tax or created acarbon market, putting a price on emissions and letting buyers and sellers decide on thecheapest way to reduce them. Instead, the government is telling a particular sector howmuch to cut and whenand then adding layers of complexity by allowing different statesdifferent ceilings. As a method of dealing with a problem, this has all the attractions of ablackout in a blizzard. 　　這不是最好的方案。理想來說，國會應該通過碳稅提案或建立碳市場，給排放定價，讓買家賣家自行決定，使用最便宜的方式減少溫室氣體排放。相反，需要政府告知一個特定部門減排量以及減排時間。由于不同州有不同的排放量上限，實施又變得更復雜。這是解決問題的一個方法，是應對打擊的一次管制。 　　But it became inevitable once Congress rejected a better approachcap-and-tradelegislationduring Mr Obama s first term. The current approach is at least better thannothing, the most likely alternative. In climate policy, delay is rarely good. The morecarbon is in the atmosphere, the more expensive it is to cut back and the more damage itdoes in the meantime. Anyway, Mr Obama s command-and-control approach does notforestall setting up a carbon market later. 　　但一旦國會拒絕了另一項更好的方案奧巴馬第一任期提出的總量控制和排放交易法案，此項提案必會得以采用。現有的方案至少比什么措施也沒有更好，是最好的替代方案。氣候政策拖延不得。大氣中的二氧化碳越多，要減量就更貴，同時會產生更大的破壞。此外，奧巴馬的命令與管制方案不會阻礙日后建立碳市場。 　　The second-best approach is dearer but not dramatically worse than the best would havebeen. Power plants and electricity consumers would bear the main burden either way. Andthe plan s benefits still outweigh its costs. One hitch is that the costs are all incurred in Americawhereas many of the benefits are spread round the world. 　　次好的方案更昂貴，但并不比最好的方案差多少。負擔主要落在了電廠和用電的消費者身上。電廠的收益依然高于成本。一個小問題是，成本都產生于美國國內，而收益遍布全球。 　　In short, the proposal is a net gain as it standsbut the international response could makeits benefits bigger. China s government is mulling over a national cap on carbon emissions,which would mean it is going further than Mr Obama. The regime in Beijing will, and should,impose such a cap in its national self-interest. But China s leaders like diplomatic cover. IfMr Obama s new rules help cajole the world s largest polluter to do more to cut emissions,then second-best would be much better than nothing. 　　總之，這項提議會收獲凈利，但是國際的反應會讓其收益更大。中國政府正在考慮在全國范圍內限制二氧化碳的排放量，想得比奧巴馬更遠。中國政府會為了國家利益進行限排管制，但中國領導熱衷于外交掩護。如果奧巴馬的新提議能讓世界上最大的污染國為減排多做點貢獻，那次好的方案就比什么方案也沒有好很多。 　　詞語解釋 　　1.account for 導致，引起 　　Do women account for more of today s affairs? 　　如今女性在婚外情中所占比例是不是更大? 　　Philosophers had long wondered how to account foressences. 　　長期以來，哲學家們困惑于如何說明這些本質。 　　2.step away from 遠離 　　But this does not mean that egypt s allies should step away from this really messy situation. 　　但這并不意味著埃及的盟友們應該遠離這個尤為混亂的局面。 　　Step away from the desk and put your hands up. 　　離開那張桌子，把你的手放在頭上。 　　3.compare with 與相比;比得上， 可與相比 　　Life isn t fair-don t compare with or be jealous of others. 　　生活并不是公平的不要比較也不要嫉妒別人。 　　Atheists have precious little to compare with this. 　　相比之下，無神論者的資源就少得可憐。 　　4.require to 要求 　　Drain piping may require to be protected against freezing. 　　泄水管要求有防凍保護措施。 　　These objects require to be quarantined on the spot. 　　這些物品需要進行現場檢疫。

　　2023復習正是強化復習階段，在考研英語中占了40分，所以考研英語閱讀是英語科目中重要的一項。名師老師曾建議過考研生需要堅持每天泛讀10-15分鐘的英文原刊。強烈推薦了雜志《經濟學人》.雜志中的文章也是考研英語的主要材料來源.希望考研考生認真閱讀，快速提高考研英語閱讀水平。 　　Climate change 　　氣候變化 　　In praise of second best 　　次好方案獲認可 　　A carbon price would be better, but Barack Obama splan to cut emissions from power plants is welcome 　　為碳排放定價顯然更為理想，但奧巴馬的電廠減排方案依然備受歡迎。 　　NOTHING is too good for the United States Congress. The Capitol even has its own powerstation. The Capitol Power Plant in south-east Washington is still puffing away, though it wasbuilt in 1910making it older than most museums of powerand even though it has notgenerated any electricity since 1951. It pipes steam and chilled water to heat or cool thenation s legislators, and in the process it pumps out over 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide ayear. In 2000, when the administrator of the plant tried to switch it over from burning coalto natural gas to cut that pollution, senators from coal-producing states ganged up to stophim. The plant symbolises everything that is wrong with America s power sector and thepolicies that influence it. 　　這對美國國會來說不是什么好事。國會甚至擁有自己的電站。位于華盛頓東南部的國會電力工廠建于1910年，歷史比大多數電力博物館還悠久。雖然這家電廠自從1951年后就不再發電，卻還在造成污染。電廠通過管道輸送蒸汽和冷凍水來為立法者們取暖納涼，在這個過程中，電廠每年會排放超過100,000噸二氧化碳。2000年，電廠管理者試圖將原來的燃料煤換成天然氣，來減少污染。但是，生產煤的各州議員卻聯合抗議。了解此電廠，可知道美國電力部門出現的問題以及影響電力部門的各項政策。 　　So President Barack Obama s proposal on June 2nd to cut CO2 emissions from power plantsis welcome. Power stations are the single biggest source of greenhouse-gas emissions inAmerica, accounting for a third of the total. The plan to cut them by 30% from their 2005level by 2030 is the biggest step an American president has taken to curb climate change forseveral decades. 　　因此，6月2號，奧巴馬總統提出減少電廠二氧化碳排放量的提議備受歡迎。電廠是美國溫室氣體排放量的最大來源，排放量約占總排放量的三分之一。根據提議，到2030年，溫室氣體排放量需在2005年的水平上下降30%。這是幾十年來，美國總統在遏制氣候變化上邁出的最大一步。 　　The proposal matters for political reasons: several states which Democrats must win if theyare to keep control of the Senate are also coal producers, where anything that hurts minersis unpopular. So the plan probably increases the chance that Republicans will recapture theupper chamber of Congress in November. It also matters because of an internationaltimetable: countries are negotiating a treaty to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions globallywhich can be signed at the end of 2023. The president s proposal makes it more likely thatsome such deal will see the light of day. 　　從政治的角度，這項提議很重要：為了守住議會的席位，民主黨必須要爭取幾個生產煤的州的支持，在這些州，有損礦主利益的行為不受待見。所以，這項提議很可能增加共和黨于11月重獲國會上議院席位的幾率。從國際上看，這項提議也很重要：各國將要商定一項在全球范圍內減少溫室氣體排放量的條約，并可能于2023年底簽署。奧巴馬的提議使得類似協議有了一絲曙光。 　　Because of these implications, the plan has been greeted in America with wild partisanship.The left welcomes it as a decisive step away from fossil fuels. The right condemns it as anew tax on American companies and consumers which will only help China, where pollutionwill rise further, negating any benefit to the climate. Both views are exaggerated. Thetruth is that the proposal won t save the planet, but it will bring about small improvementsthat are worth having. 　　因為上述原因，美國國內對此項提議態度分立。左派贊成，認為這是減少化石燃料決定性的一步。右派則指責，這只會加重美國企業和消費者的稅賦負擔，而得益于中國。中國人口不斷上漲，這會抵消此項提議帶來的利益。雙方的觀點都被夸大了。事實是，這項提議不會拯救地球，但是，它依然能帶來意義非凡的些許進步。 　　Satisfyingly mediocre 　　令人滿意的平庸方案 　　Assuming the plan is carried out, it would reduce total American carbon emissions by around5%. That is a lot for one measure, though tiny compared with the overall cuts required torein in climate change. American power plants have already reduced their emissions by 15%since 2005, so requiring them to cut the same amount over a longer period is not tooarduous. The plan will raise electricity prices and kill some jobs, but it will also save lives,most immediately by cutting particulate pollution. 　　假設這項提議得以實施，美國的碳排放量會減少約5%。雖然對于應對氣候變化所要求的總排放量這還不夠，但對于這一具體措施，已然進步巨大。自2005年以來，美國的電廠已經將溫室氣體排放量減少了15%，因此，在更長時間期限內減少等量氣體排放應該是可行的。這項提議會提高電費，減少部分工作，但也因減少了粒狀物污染拯救了部分生命。 　　It is far from the best policy. Ideally, Congress would have passed a carbon tax or created acarbon market, putting a price on emissions and letting buyers and sellers decide on thecheapest way to reduce them. Instead, the government is telling a particular sector howmuch to cut and whenand then adding layers of complexity by allowing different statesdifferent ceilings. As a method of dealing with a problem, this has all the attractions of ablackout in a blizzard. 　　這不是最好的方案。理想來說，國會應該通過碳稅提案或建立碳市場，給排放定價，讓買家賣家自行決定，使用最便宜的方式減少溫室氣體排放。相反，需要政府告知一個特定部門減排量以及減排時間。由于不同州有不同的排放量上限，實施又變得更復雜。這是解決問題的一個方法，是應對打擊的一次管制。 　　But it became inevitable once Congress rejected a better approachcap-and-tradelegislationduring Mr Obama s first term. The current approach is at least better thannothing, the most likely alternative. In climate policy, delay is rarely good. The morecarbon is in the atmosphere, the more expensive it is to cut back and the more damage itdoes in the meantime. Anyway, Mr Obama s command-and-control approach does notforestall setting up a carbon market later. 　　但一旦國會拒絕了另一項更好的方案奧巴馬第一任期提出的總量控制和排放交易法案，此項提案必會得以采用。現有的方案至少比什么措施也沒有更好，是最好的替代方案。氣候政策拖延不得。大氣中的二氧化碳越多，要減量就更貴，同時會產生更大的破壞。此外，奧巴馬的命令與管制方案不會阻礙日后建立碳市場。 　　The second-best approach is dearer but not dramatically worse than the best would havebeen. Power plants and electricity consumers would bear the main burden either way. Andthe plan s benefits still outweigh its costs. One hitch is that the costs are all incurred in Americawhereas many of the benefits are spread round the world. 　　次好的方案更昂貴，但并不比最好的方案差多少。負擔主要落在了電廠和用電的消費者身上。電廠的收益依然高于成本。一個小問題是，成本都產生于美國國內，而收益遍布全球。 　　In short, the proposal is a net gain as it standsbut the international response could makeits benefits bigger. China s government is mulling over a national cap on carbon emissions,which would mean it is going further than Mr Obama. The regime in Beijing will, and should,impose such a cap in its national self-interest. But China s leaders like diplomatic cover. IfMr Obama s new rules help cajole the world s largest polluter to do more to cut emissions,then second-best would be much better than nothing. 　　總之，這項提議會收獲凈利，但是國際的反應會讓其收益更大。中國政府正在考慮在全國范圍內限制二氧化碳的排放量，想得比奧巴馬更遠。中國政府會為了國家利益進行限排管制，但中國領導熱衷于外交掩護。如果奧巴馬的新提議能讓世界上最大的污染國為減排多做點貢獻，那次好的方案就比什么方案也沒有好很多。 　　詞語解釋 　　1.account for 導致，引起 　　Do women account for more of today s affairs? 　　如今女性在婚外情中所占比例是不是更大? 　　Philosophers had long wondered how to account foressences. 　　長期以來，哲學家們困惑于如何說明這些本質。 　　2.step away from 遠離 　　But this does not mean that egypt s allies should step away from this really messy situation. 　　但這并不意味著埃及的盟友們應該遠離這個尤為混亂的局面。 　　Step away from the desk and put your hands up. 　　離開那張桌子，把你的手放在頭上。 　　3.compare with 與相比;比得上， 可與相比 　　Life isn t fair-don t compare with or be jealous of others. 　　生活并不是公平的不要比較也不要嫉妒別人。 　　Atheists have precious little to compare with this. 　　相比之下，無神論者的資源就少得可憐。 　　4.require to 要求 　　Drain piping may require to be protected against freezing. 　　泄水管要求有防凍保護措施。 　　These objects require to be quarantined on the spot. 　　這些物品需要進行現場檢疫。