资源描述
The End Is Not at HandThe environmental rhetoric overblown.The planet will surviveRobert J. SamuelsonWhoever coined the phrase save the planet is a public relation genius. It conveys the sense of impending catastrophe and high purpose that has wrapped environmentalism in an aura of moral urgency.It also typifies environmentalisms rhetorical excesses, which, in any other context, would be seen as wild exaggeration or simple dishonesty.无论是谁杜撰了“拯救地球 ”这一说法，他都是一位公共关系方面的天才。这一说法既表达了对即将来临的灭顶之灾的意识，也满怀着使环境保护论带有道义紧迫感这一大的目标。同时这种说法也表明环境保护论言过其实，这种夸大在其他任何场合都会被视为是在危言耸听或愚蠢的欺骗。Up to a point, our environmental awareness has checked a mindless enthusiasm for unrestrained economic growth.We have sensibly curbed some of growths harmful side effects. But environmentalism increasingly resembles a holy crusade addicted to hype and ignorant of history.Every environmental ill is depicted as an onrushing calamity thatif not stopped will end life as we know it.就某种程度而言，我们的环境意识遏制了对自由经济增长所表现出的盲目热情。我们已明智地抑制了增长中所出现的一些有害的副作用，但是环境保护论却越来越像一场沉缅于狂热的宣传与对历史一无所知的圣战。每一由环境问题引发的不幸都被描绘成一场势不可挡的灾难。这场灾难如不加以制止，正像我们所知晓的那样，就会摧毁生命。Take the latest scare: the greenhouse effect. We re presented with the horrifying specter of a world that incinerates itself.Act now, or sizzle later. Food supplies will wither. Glaciers will melt. Coastal areas will flood. In fact, the probable losses from any greenhouse warming are modest: 1 to 2 percent of our economys output by the year 2050, estimates economist William Cline.The loss seems even smaller compared with the expected growth of the economy (a doubling) over the same period.以最近出现的恐慌温室效应为例。展现在我们面前的是一个自我焚毁、可怕的幽灵般的世界。即刻行动，否则世界将咝咝烧焦。食品供应即将枯竭。冰川即将溶化。沿海地区即将淹没。事实上，任何温室热效应可能造成的损失都是有限的：经济学家威廉 克莱恩估计，到 2050年只占我们经济产出的 1%到 2%。与预想的同期经济增长 (翻一番 )相比，这一损失更显得微不足道。 No environmental problem threatens the planet or rates with the danger of a nuclear war.No oil spill ever caused suffering on a par with todays civil war in Yugoslavia, which is a minor episode in human misery. World War left more than 35 million dead. Cambodias civil war resulted in 1 million to 3 million deaths.The great scourges of humanity remain what they have always been: war, natural disaster, oppressive government, crushing poverty and hate. On any scale of tragedy, environmental distress is a featherweight.没有任何环境问题威胁这颗 “星球 ”，任何环境问题无法用核战争所带所来的危害来衡量。任何石油溢出造成的危害也无法同今日南斯拉夫内战它不过是人类苦难中的一段小插曲相比拟。第二次世界大战导致3 500 多万人死亡。柬埔寨内战导致100至300万人死亡。人类的巨大祸患一如既往：战争、自然灾害、暴虐政府、极度的贫困与仇恨。在悲剧的任何尺度上，环境问题造成的痛苦都轻如鸿毛。This is not an argument for indifference or inaction. It is an argument for perspective and balance. You can believe (as I do) that the possibility of greenhouse warming enhances an already strong case for an energy tax.A tax would curb ordinary air pollution, limit oil imports, cut the budget deficit and promote energy efficient investments that make economic sense.这并非在为漠不关心或无动于衷进行辩解，这是在为前途和平衡而进行辩论。你可以相信 (像我那样 )，温室热效应的可能性强化了已具说服力的征缴能源税的理由。税收会抑制通常的空气污染，限制石油进口，减少预算赤字并提高具有经济意义的能效投入。But it does not follow that anyone who disagrees with me is evil or even wrong.On the greenhouse effect, for instance, theres ample scientific doubt over whether warming will occur and, if so, how much. Moreover, the warming would occur over decades. People and businesses could adjust. To take one example: farmers could shift to more heat-resistant seeds.但这并非意味着同我观点相悖的人就是居心叵测，或甚至是错误的。例如，就温室效应而言，热效应是否会发生，如果发生，其程度如何，对这类问题还存在大量的科学疑问。此外，热效应的发生需几十年的时间。人与行业可以进行调整。举一例：农民可改用更为耐热的种子。Unfortunately, the impulse of many environmentalists is to vilify and simplify. Critics of environmental restrictions are portrayed as selfish and ignorant creeps.Doomsday scenarios are developed to prove the seriousness of environmental dangers. Clines recent greenhouse study projected warming 250 years into the future. Guess what, it increases sharply. This is an absurd exercise akin to predicting life in 1992 at the time of the French and Indian War (17541763).遗憾的是，许多环境保护论者感情用事，搞中伤和将事情简单化。环境限制法的批评者被描绘为自私自利、愚昧无知的小人。创作出了有关世界末日的电影剧本以证实环境危险的严重性。克莱恩最近对温室效应的研究展现了热效应在今后 250年间的变化。猜猜吧，结果是什么 ?它在急剧增长。这就类似于一种在法印战争（17541763）时期预言 1992的生活的无稽之谈。The rhetorical overkill is not just innocent excess. It clouds our understanding. For starters, it minimizes the great progress that has been made, especially in industrialized countries. In the United States, air and water pollution have dropped dramatically.Since 1960, particulate emissions (soot, cinders) are down by 65 percent. Lead emissions have fallen by 97 percent since 1970. Smog has declined in most cities.大谈特谈过多的伤亡并非过分的无知，它混淆人们的视听。对工业刚起步的国家来说，它低估了特别是工业化国家已取得的巨大成就。在美国，空气与水污染已得到显著缓解。自 1960年以来，微颗粒物排放量（煤灰、煤渣）已下降 65%。自 1970年以来，铅排放量已降低 97%。在大多数城市中，烟雾已减少。Whats also lost is the awkward necessity for choices. Your environmental benefit may be my job. Not every benefit is worth having at any cost.Economists estimate that environmental regulations depress the economys output by 2.6 to 5 percent, or about $150 billion to $290 billion. (Note: this is larger than the estimated impact of global warming.) For that cost, weve lowered health risks and improved our surroundings. But some gains are small compared with the costs. And some costs are needlessly high because regulations are rigid.同时我们也受到损失。这就是必须进行棘手的选择。你在环保方面所得到的好处也许就是我应尽的义务。并非每种利益都值得不惜任何代价而求之。经济学家估计，环境法规使经济产出下降 2.6%至 5%，或 1 500亿至 2 900亿美元（注：这一数字大于全球热效应的估计影响）。我们用这一代价的确减轻了给身体所带来的危害，并且改善了我们的环境。但是，有些却得不偿失，而且由于法规的刻板僵化而使得一些代价毫无必要地上升。Balance: The worst sin of environmental excess is its bias against economic growth. The cure for the immense problems of poor countries usually lies with economic growth. A recent report from the World Bank estimates that more than 1 billion people lack healthy water supplies and sanitary facilities.The result is hundreds of millions of cases of diarrhea annually and the deaths of 3 million children (2 million of which the World Bank judges avoidable). Only by becoming wealthier can countries correct these conditions.平衡：过份夸大环境作用的最大罪过是对经济增长所执的偏见。解决贫困国家所存在的大量问题通常与经济增长息息相关。世界银行最近的一份报告估计， 10亿多人缺少健康用水和卫生设施。其结果是每年成千百万人患痢疾，并导致三百万儿童死亡（世界银行认为，其中 200万人可以免于死亡）。国家只有变得富裕起来才能改变这些状况。Similarly, wealthier societies have both the desire and the income to clean their air and water. Advanced nations have urban-air-pollution levels only a sixth that of the poorest countries. Finally, economic growth tends to reduce high birthrates, as children survive longer and women escape traditional roles.与此同理，较富庶的国家既具有愿望也具有财政收入来静化空气和用水，发达国家的城市空气污染仅为贫穷国家的六分之一。最终，经济增长将降低高的出生率，因为儿童寿命延长了，妇女也摆脱了传统的角色。Yes, we have environmental problems. Reactors in the former Soviet Union pose safety risks. Economic growth and the environment can be at odds. Growth generates carbon dioxide emissions and causes more waste. But these problems are not - as environmental rhetoric implies - the main obstacles to sustained development. The biggest hurdle is inept government. Inept government fostered unsafe reactors. Inept government hampers food production in poor countries by, say, preventing farmers from earning adequate returns on their crops.的确，我们存在环境问题。前苏联的反应堆给安全造成威胁。经济增长与环境会发生矛盾。增长产生二氧化碳排放物，并且造成更多的废弃物。但是这些问题并不像环境保护论者夸夸其谈的那样，是持续发展的主要障碍。最大的障碍是无能的政府。无能的政府培育出无安全保障的反应堆。在贫穷的国家，无能的政府，比如说，通过限止农民从其作物中获得适当的利润，阻碍食品生产。By now, everyone is an environmentalist. But the label is increasingly meaningless, because not all environmental problems are equally serious and even the serious ones need to be balanced against other concerns. Environmentalism should hold the hype. It should inform us more and frighten us less.到现在为止，人人都是环境保护论者，但是这种说法越来越没有意义，因为并非一切环境问题都同样严重，甚至即使那些严重的环境问题也需要同其他利害关系来均衡考虑。环境保护论应当终止那种刺激性宣传。它应当给予我们更多一些信息，更少一些恐吓。Supplementary ReadingJAKARTA - Planet Earth was battered by floods, drought and fire in 1997, a year which ended with the worlds major polluters squabbling over ways to prevent further environmental disaster.The 160 nations attending a UN conference on global warming, billed as one of the most vital ever held, finally reached a consensus on cutting greenhouse gas emissions through the next decade.The climate was dominated in the latter part of the year by El Nino, an upswelling of warmer water off the South American coast which affects global weather patterns. I think for sure the most dramatic thing has been the El Nino phenomenon that has been experienced throughout the tropics, said Jeffrey Sayer, director general of the International Centre for Forestry Research (CIFOR),at Bogor near Jakarta.El Nino, called by Peruvian fisherman after the Christ Child because of its appearance around Christmas, is being blamed for widespread floods and drought in the tropics, and has affected other areas as well.A major manifestation of the phenomenon was drought-aggravated bush fires in Indonesia that spread a choking smog across large areas of Southeast Asia before badly delayed monsoon rains started to fall in late November.Floods swept arid Somalia in East Africa, while the rain forests of Indonesias lrian Jaya dried out and hundreds of tribes people died from starvation and disease.Apart from El Nino, eastern and central Europe suffered the worst floods in living memory in early July, with over 100 people killed in Poland and the Czech Republic, and many thousands of families displaced through the region and eastern Germany.In the ancient Japanese capital of Kyoto, a UN gathering of 159 countries finally agreed on cutting greenhouse gas emissions after 11 days of frenetic negotiations.Perhaps this day will be in the future remembered as the Day of the Atmosphere, conference chairman Raul Estrada told the conference after a treaty text was passed by consensus on December 11.The conference agreed that developed nations should cut emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.The United States accepted a 7 per cent cut from 1990 levels by 20082112， the European Union 8 per cent and Japan 6 per cent.The conference accepted scientific evidence that heating of the Earths surface by gases trapped in the atmosphere causes more and fiercer storms, expanding deserts, melting polar ice and raising sea levels which threaten to submerge low lying islands-and some island states, such as the Maldives in the Indian Ocean.The United States wants developing countries brought under the emission control umbrella and the treaty still faces a major hurdle in its passage in Washington through a potentially hostile Republican Congress.US Vice President Al Gore called the Kyoto agreement a vital turning point， but echoed the EUs Environment Minister Ritt Bjerregaard that more still needed to be done. This is not good enough for the future.we would like the parties to be more ambitious, Bjerregaard said.Indonesias Environment Minister Sarwono Kusumaatmadja said it was up to the developed countries to provide the leadership to guarantee Earths future.The Kyoto conference would at least provide a greater awareness of environmental problems, particularly as it took place in an El Nino year.But there is always a time lag between awareness and action, and I think that the time lag can be very long.he said.He also condemned Western criticism of the environmental and conservation policies of developing countries, saying market forces were responsible for many of the problems.Basically, we are facing problems with the present contemporary civilization with its consumption and production attitude.The market is not friendly to the environment ,and we are part of the market. It is too big a problem for us to handle .so they want to have their cake and eat it.They want to have their market and they want to have us perform as guardians of the worlds environment without them having anything to do with it.The Kyoto conference also pitted big business against campaigners for the environment-although major insurance organizations did offer support to the greens.CIFORs Sayer told reporters that a major development in the last two or three years was the emergence of major multinational corporations in the global timber industry.This is not necessarily a bad thing because those companies also have the resources to practice sustainable forestry if they are motivated to do so.
展开阅读全文