只用一本书提高英语听力能力!重温经典名著双语阅读小编推荐:跟着纪录片学英语不背单词和语法,轻松学英语
返回列表 回复 发帖

[BBC] 【整理】BBC Podcast 2008-10-07

提高英语听力能力 找对方法很重要!

hw

This is a download from the BBC. To find out more, visit bbc.co.uk/readio4.

 

China’s carbon dioxide emissions have been growing so fast that if it hasn’t already, will soon overtake the United States as the world’s biggest polluter. Despite that, it says that it’s those industrialized countries which cause the problem which should be responsible for 95% cuts by 2050. Lord Stern who produces the government review of the economics climate change is speaking at the essay today about what the global deal for climate change should look like.

 

And I asked him, if China was right. 

 

The West should certainly take the lead and cut by at least 80%, and in some cases, more than 90% between 1990 and 2050. And the reason the West should take the lead is that they are responsible for the majority of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere now because they followed high carbon growth for so long. If you look where we need to be by 2050, we need to get to roughly two tons per capital of greenhouse gases measured in carbon dioxide equilibrium. If you look well say Europe’s now, Europe’s is at 10 or 12. So dividing by five, it’s a cut by 80%. It’s what’s necessary to get down to that level. But everybody has to be involved in this. It can’t be the rich countries alone.

 

The trouble is though that who’s ever responsible for the mess in terms of clean at all, China’s already the world’s second biggest emitter of carbon dioxide. And it’s expected to overtake America soon.

 

It has probably already overtaken America. China is around 5 tons per capital at the moment. And China, we all hope, will continue its rapid growth. So China’s got major challenge because China too has to get down to roughly two tons per capital, because the world needs the average two tons per capital. And it won’t be possible to do that unless the big blocks are around that level.

 

But don’t you therefore need to structure that into any deal when world leaders sit down to replace Kyoto or continue Kyoto. They got to take account the fact that China has to have something in place to get it to two tons.

 

 

Yes, it does. And the challenge there will be to for rich countries to take on their commitments clearly and strongly now for at least 80% reductions by 2050, and credibly interim targets along the way. If that happens, I believe that you would see a strong participation by China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, many of the other big developing countries. So if the rich countries take that lead, I think it will be reasonable to look for a deal where China, India and so on commit to commit within five or ten years.

 

We have a problem, don’t we that countries now are rustling with prospect of recession and they are more worried about their economies than climate change and many people think it is right to solve the economies first then deal with the problem of climate change.

 

We’ve got to find low carbon growth. If we stick with our current model, we will choke off growth. One thing we must have learnt from the story of the very serious financial problems facing the world, and the turbulence facing the world in the financial markets now is you have to look ahead and think about the consequences of few actions. This, I mean crisis, was 10, 15, 20 years in the making on the financial markets. If we’d thought carefully of the interim period, we could have avoided this. We have to treat the climate change in the same way. If we leave this for 10, 15, 20 years, we’ll be in very difficult circumstances.

 

But we have a situation where Europe who’s considering that plans this week, are considering watering them down because they’ve got pressure not at least from eastern European countries, saying, look, they’ve got problems with the result of the economic downturn, and they won’t want to water down the climate change commitments.

 

That would be a serious mistake in my view. And I think we should look for leadership in the UK and Europe as a whole on this issue has Europe, has been a leader in the past. There will be countries such as Poland that depend very heavily on coal that are not keen to expose themselves uncertainties, depends on Russian gas. So those countries have to be helped to find a clean coal. And that means carbon caption and storage for coal has to be established, and has to be established quickly. And Poland and many other countries can do much more on energy efficiency. Those kinds of ways are the right way forward not to abandon a commitment though leads into very serious problems before too long.

 

And when you talk about clean coal, would you think about the coal-fire power station, the tower plan. Should there be, they only be allowed to go ahead with certain commitment? How should that work?

 

I think they should be planed to involve carbon caption and storage from the beginning.

 

And if not, they don’t get to go ahead.

I think that’s right. But I think I’d rather look at this much more positively and see them as a part of a big investment in clean coal to make sure that it works well.

 

Lord Stern, many thanks.                    

 

[ 本帖最后由 sainfoinwy 于 2008-10-7 13:16 编辑 ]
1

评分次数

  • jjmm

返回列表