Test1第三篇

The truth about the Environment

For many environmentalists, the world seems to be getting worse. They have developed a hit-list of main fears: that natural resources are running out；That the population is ever growing, leaving less and less to eat; that species are becoming extinct in vast numbers, and that the plant’s air and water are becoming ever more polluted.

 对于许多环保人士，世界似乎将变得更加差。他们已经罗列了一份关于主要担忧的清单：正在消失的自然资源; 日益增长的人口; 留下越来越少的可以吃的东西；物种在以一个很大的数字变得灭亡，和星球的空气和水正在被污染的更加严重。

 But a quick look at the facts shows a different picture . First, energy and other natural resources have become more abundant, not less so, since the book ‘the limits to Growth’ was published in 1972 by a group of scientists.

但是一个快速的检查在展示一个不同图片。 首先，能源和其他资源已经变得更加充足，不是更少，自从《 成长上限》被一些科学家印刷在1972年。

Second, more food is now produced per head of the world’s population than at any time in history. Fewer people are starving. Third, Although species are indeed becoming extinct ,only about 0.7% of them are expected to disappear in the next 50 years, not 25-50%, as has so often been predicted. And finally, most forms of environment pollution either appear to have been therefore best cured not by restricting economic growth, but by accelerating it.

第二,更多的食物是现在生产的世界人口人均比历史上任何时候。更少的人正在挨饿。第三,虽然确实物种灭绝,只有0.7%的人预计将在未来的50年内消失,不是25 - 50%,所以经常被预测。最后,大多数形式的环境污染也因此似乎是最好的治愈而不是限制经济增长,但通过加速。

One appear to be a phenomenon that is going to extend well into our future, but its total impact is unlikely to pose a devastating problem . A bigger problem may well turn out to be an inappropriate response to it.

似乎是一个现象,将扩展到我们的未来,但它总不太可能造成毁灭性的影响问题。一个更大的问题很可能是一个不恰当的反应。

 Yet opinion polls suggest that many people nurture the belief that environmental standards are declining and four factors seem to cause his disjunction between perception and reality.

然而,民意调查显示,许多人培养相信环保标准下降和四个因素似乎引起他的感知和现实之间的脱节

 One is lopsidedness built into scientific research. Scientific funding goes mainly to areas with many problems, that may be wise policy , but it will also create an impression that many more potential problems exist than is the case.

一个是不匀称构建到科学研究。科学的资金主要流入地区的很多问题,这可能是明智的政策,但它也将创建一个印象,比情况存在很多潜在的问题。

Secondly, environmental groups need to be noticed by the mass media. They also  need

To keep the money rolling in. understandably, perhaps, they sometimes overstate their arguments. In 1997 , for example, the world wide fund for nature issued a press release entitled:’ two thirds of the world’s forests lost forever.’ The truth turns out to be nearer 20%.

其次,环保团体需要注意到大众媒体。他们也需要保持资金滚滚而来。可以理解的是,也许,他们有时会夸大他们的论点。例如在1997年,世界自然基金会发布了一份新闻稿标题为:“世界上三分之二的森林永远失去了。真相原来是接近20%。

  Though these groups are run overwhelming by selfless folk, they nevertheless share many of the characteristics of other lobby groups. That would matter less if people applied the same degree of skepticism to environmental lobbying as they do to lobby groups in other fields. A trade organization arguing for, weaker pollution controls is instantly as self-interested. Yet a green organisation opposing such a weakening is seen as altruistic, even if an impartial view of the controls in question might suggest they are doing more harm than good.

尽管这些组织运行压倒性通过无私的人,他们不过分享许多其他游说团体的特点。将物质少,如果人们将怀疑度环境游说游说团体在其他领域一样。贸易组织主张,较弱的污染控制是立即是自私自利的。然而绿色组织反对这样一个削弱被看作是利他的,即使一个公正的视图控件的问题可能显示他们是弊大于利。

 A third source of confusion is the attitude of the media. People are clearly more curious about bad news than good.  Newspapers and broadcasters are there to provide what the example was America’s encounter with El nino in 1997 and 1998. This climatic phenomenon was accused of wrecking tourism, causing allergies, melting the ski-slopes and causing 22 deaths. However, according to an article in the Bulletin of the American amounted to some US 19 billion. There came from higher winter temperatures（ which  saved an estimated 850 lives, reduced heating costs and diminished spring floods caused by meltwaters.）

混乱的第三个来源是媒体的态度。人们显然比好好奇的坏消息。报纸和广播公司有提供的例子是美国的遭遇在1997和1998年厄尔尼诺现象。这种气候现象被指控破坏旅游,导致过敏,融化的滑雪场,造成22人死亡。然而,根据一篇文章《美国一些美国190亿。有来自更高的冬季气温(估计拯救了850人的生命,降低供热成本和减少春季洪水造成的融水)。

The fourth factor is poor individual perception.  People worry that the endless rise in the amount of stuff everyone throws away will cause the world to run out of places to dispose of waste. Yet, even if America’s trash output continues to rise as it has done in the past, and even if the American population doubles by 2100, all the rubbish America produces through the entire 21^st century will still take up only one-12,000^th of the area of the entire Untied States.

第四个因素是可怜的个人看法。人担心无休止的增加数量的东西每个人都扔掉将导致世界的处置废物的地方。然而,即使美国的垃圾产量持续上升,因为它已经过去,即使美国人口翻倍到2100年,所有美国垃圾产生整个21世纪仍将只有一个——整个美国面积的12000。

So what of global warming? . As we know , carbon dioxide emissions are causing the planet to warm . the best estimates are that the temperatures will rise by 2-3℃ in this century , causing considerable problems, at a total cost of US 5,000 billion.

那么全球变暖呢?。众所周知,二氧化碳的排放导致地球变暖。最好的估计本世纪气温将上升2 - 3℃,导致相当大的问题,在美国5万亿年的总成本。

Despite the intuition that something drastic needs to be done about such a costly problem, economic analyses clearly show it will be far more expensive to cut carbon dioxide emissions radically than to pay the costs of adaptation to the increased temperatures. A model by one of the main authors of the United Nations Climate Change Panel shows how an expected temperature increase of 2.1 degrees in 2100 would only be diminished to an increase of 1.9 degrees. Or to put it another way, the temperature increase that the planet would have experienced in 2094 would be postponed to 2100.

尽管直觉,一些激烈的需要做这样一个昂贵的问题,经济分析清楚地表明这将是昂贵得多比支付削减二氧化碳排放量从根本上适应温度的增加的成本。一个模型的主要作者之一的联合国气候变化小组展示了2100年预计气温上升2.1度只会被削弱增加1.9度。或者换句话说,温度升高,地球将在2094年经历了将推迟到2100年。

So this does not prevent global warming, but merely buys the world six years. Yet the cost of reducing carbon dioxide emissions, for the United States alone, will be higher than the cost of solving the world’s single, most pressing health problem: providing universal access to clean drinking water and sanitation. Such measures would avoid 2 million deaths every year, and prevent half a billion people from becoming seriously ill.

所以这并不阻止全球变暖,但仅仅是购买世界六年。然而,减少二氧化碳排放的成本,仅在美国,将高于解决世界的单一的成本,最紧迫的健康问题:提供普及清洁饮用水和卫生设施。这些措施可以避免每年200万人死亡,并防止十亿人成为重病。

 It is crucial that we look at the facts if we want to make the best possible decisions for the future. It may be costly to be overly optimistic-but more costly still to be too pessimistic.

关键是我们看看事实如果我们想为将来做出最好的决策。它可能是昂贵的过于乐观,但更加昂贵的过于悲观。