在东南亚地区被热议的燃煤发电项目多数已经被外国政府和银行持有,而其中的大部分项目因风险太大不太适合私人部门(对应国有)进行投资。英国网友:看来将会发生什么有趣的事。至少,如果有增长的话,那将比4年前或5年前预计的要少。所以要往正确的方向走,但有可能不够快。这显然会差很多。
-------------译者:恭-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
The much-discussed boom in coal-fired power in south-east Asia is being bankrolled by foreign governments and banks with the vast majority of projects apparently too risky for the private sector.
在东南亚地区被热议的燃煤发电项目多数已经被外国政府和银行持有,而其中的大部分项目因风险太大不太适合私人部门(对应国有)进行投资。
Environmental analysts at activist group Market Forces examined 22 deals involving 13.1 gigawatts of coal-fired power in Indonesia and found that 91% of the projects had the backing of foreign governments through export credit agencies or development banks.
在维权群市场环境组织分析调查了22宗涉及印度尼西亚13.1兆瓦燃煤发电,发现91%的项目有外国政府的支持,通过出口信贷机构和开发银行。
-------------译者:恭-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
Export credit agencies which provide subsidised loans to overseas projects to assist export industries in their home countries were involved in 64% of the deals and provided 45% of the total lending.
为海外项目提供补贴贷款的出口信贷机构为了本国的出口工业而参与了64%的交易,提供了贷款总额的45%。
The majority of the money was coming from Japan and China with the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) involved in five deals and the Export-Import Bank of China (Cexim) involved in seven deals. All the deals closed between January 2010 and March 2017.
大多数的钱是来自日本和中国,日本国际协力银行(JBIC)参与了五笔交易,中国进出口银行(Cexim)参与了七笔交易。所有交易在2010年1月至2017年3月之间达成。
The China Development Bank was the biggest development bank lending to the projects imparting $3bn with a further $240m in development funds coming from Korea’s Korea Development Bank.
中国国家开发银行所借出的款项最多,达到30亿美元,远远超过来自韩国的韩国开发银行的2.4亿美元。
-------------译者:恭-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
The lending comes despite the world’s biggest development bank – the World Bank – warning last year that plans to build more coal-fired power plants in Asia would be a “disaster for the planet” and overwhelm the deal forged at Paris to fight climate change.
尽管世界上最大的开发银行——世界银行去年警告说,在亚洲建造更多的燃煤发电厂的计划将会是一场“地球灾难”,并压倒了在巴黎应对气候变化方面达成的协议。
“Right now several key countries supporting the Paris climate change agreement are actively undermining it by trying to expand the polluting coal-power sector in other countries” said Julien Vincent executive director of Market Forces.
According to the International Energy Agency the world needs to phase out coal-power by 2050 in order to keep warming under 2C.
“目前,支持巴黎气候协议的几个关键国家正在其他国家不断的加大火力发电厂的建设,这严重削弱了巴黎气候协议“市场力量的执行主任Julien Vincent说。
根据国际能源机构的说法,在2050年前,世界需要逐步淘汰煤炭火力发电,以便使气温上升保持在2摄氏度以下。
-------------译者:huster-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
Thorlar1
“Right now several key countries supporting the Paris climate change agreement are actively undermining it by trying to expand the polluting coal-power sector in other countries” Like our very own Matt Canavan who claims that our coal exports to other countries are OK because we won't won't be burning it thus ensuring that our commitment to the Paris agreement can be met even if we all live on the same planet the one where fossil fuel emissions and their global climate changing capacity have no respect for borders.
现在,几个支持巴黎气候变化协议的关键国家正在积极地破坏这一协议,他们试图在其他国家扩展高污染的煤电行业。像我们的Matt Canavan声称我们的煤炭出口到其他国家是好的因为这样我们就不会烧煤从而确保我们对巴黎协议的承诺,即使我们都生活在同一个星球上化石燃料排放和改变全球气候的能力没有国界。
Thorlar1
Not to mention the costs of re-mediating all the environmental and atmospheric damage that has been done since the industrial revolution which if it had been factored in from the start would have ensured coal mining and burning would never have been economically viable in the first place.
更不用说补救自工业革命以来所有环境和大气破坏的成本了,如果从一开始就考虑到这一点,那就首先确保了煤炭的开采和燃烧在经济上永远都是不可行的。
-------------译者:恭-审核者:周天寰宇2------------
Wolframite
Repeating yourself makes you look mentally deficient. I have not said that.
You do realize that the 10 most abundant compounds on earth are oxides of one form or another. Your assumption seems to be that the only place oxygen bound be going is to CO2. There is a scientific expression for the amount of reduction of Oxygen in the atmosphere- statistically insignificant. You can't even attribute any cost the this reduction yet you want to hand the USA a bill for it.
你自己再重新看一下,这让你看起来精神有缺陷。我没说过那件事。
你们确实认识到地球上10种最丰富的化合物是一种或另一种形式的氧化物。你似乎认为氧气只会变成二氧化碳。大气中氧气含量的减少有一种科学的表述,几乎可以忽略不计。你甚至不能把这种减少归因于任何能源消耗,但是你却想把账单交给美国。
xwookey
Merely because one event occurs simultaneously or after another event does not mean the second is the cause of the first Are you _really_ trying to claim that
C + O2 -----> CO2
does not apply when fossil fuels are burned?
That makes you look pretty silly.
一个事件同时发生或者在另一个事件之后发生,并不意味着第二个事件是第一个事件的原因。
你真的试图说明C + O2 -----> CO2不适用于化石燃料燃烧时?
这让你看起来很蠢。
-------------译者:恭-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
Wolframite
And you are invoking Post-hoc ergo proctor hoc. Merely because one event occurs simultaneously or after another event does not mean the second is the cause of the first.
你是不是在请求某监考组织的帮助。仅仅因为一个事件同时发生或在另一个事件之后发生,并不意味着第二个事件是第一个事件的起因。
rockyrex
Similar events can have different causes. You are I suspect invoking something called The Forest Fire Fallacy. It goes a bit like this: "Forest fires happened before people were around to throw lighted matches into the undergrowth so no current forest fire can be caused by people."
类似的事件可能有不同的原因。我怀疑你援引了一个叫做森林火灾谬论的东西。它有点像这样:“之前发生了森林火灾,人们往灌木丛里扔点燃的火柴,所以现在的森林火灾都不是人为引起的。
rockyrex
Did you look at the graph? The specific decline of O2 recently is the point.
你看图表了吗?最近二氧化碳下降了,这才是关键。
-------------译者:恭-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
Wolframite
Never said that. What I said is that the decline in the O2 content of the atmosphere which began 800000 years ago exceeds the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by a factor of 17. It could not possibly have all been turned into CO2.
我从来没有这样说过。我说的是,800000年前开始,大气中O2含量的下降超过了大气中二氧化碳的17倍。它不可能全部变成二氧化碳。
rockyrex
So you now claim that C + O2 -----> CO2 does not apply when fossil fuels are burned. #FakeChemistry
所以你现在宣称, C + O2 -----> CO2并不适用于化石燃料被燃烧时。
Wolframite
The Amount of O2 in the atmosphere has declined by .7% over the last 800000 years and like CO2 the earths temperature etc. it never has been constant. In any case the atmosphere is .04% CO2. The O2 content of the atmosphere has decline by more than 17 times the entire amount of CO2 currently in the atmosphere so that is not where the Oxygen went. Your claims make no sense.
在过去的800000年中,大气中的氧含量下降了0.7%,像二氧化碳、地球温度等,从来没有保持不变。在任何情况下大气中CO2比例只有0.04 %。大气中氧含量下降程度达到了目前大气中二氧化碳含量的17倍,所以不是氧气去那里了。你的主张毫无道理。
-------------译者:恭-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
rockyrex
You can see that the drop in O2 matches the rise in CO2 - this would not be happening without the burning of fossil fuels. The specific point is that people are using a resource without paying - if you buy salt that came from sea or a salt mine you pay. Why not pay your way?
你可以看到O2的下降与二氧化碳的上升成相匹配——如果没有化石燃料的燃烧,这种情况就不会发生。具体的一点是,人们使用的是一种没有付钱的资源——如果你买的是海盐或你付钱的盐矿。为什么不付钱呢?
这种下降是多少化石燃料使用的结果,而氧气的下降又会产生何种可量化的负面影响?
rockyrex
Anyone who burns fossil fuels is responsible but the US has the biggest share (29.2% 1850-2002) of cumulative effects from that process.
谁消耗化石燃料谁就应该负责,在这个过程中,美国所产生的累积效应最大,占到29.2%(1850-2002年)。
Wolframite
And your proof that the US is responsible for this proposed drop is.......
你认为美国应该为氧气的下降负责,证据呢。。。。
-------------译者:恭-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
Bolowski
Try an old text for some evidence: things have got a lot worse since then https://www.scribd.com/mobile/document/52830459/For-Richer-For-Poorer-An-Oxfam-report-on-western-connections-with-world-hunger
我试图从旧文本中寻找一些证据:不过自从看了这个以后,情况变得更糟了。https://www.scribd.com/mobile/document/52830459/For-Richer-For-Poorer-An-Oxfam-report-on-western-connections-with-world-hunger
Bolowski
Why would I need a tinfoil hat Daniel? To shield me from reality? Are you blind stupid or just willfully stupid?
丹尼尔,我为什么需要一顶锡纸帽?把我从现实中拯救出来?你是真蠢还是假蠢吗?
rockyrex
Yes there is less oxygen in the air now. CO2 rises and the O2/N2 ratio changes too. Here's a graph that illustrates this: https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/sites/default/files/styles/node_lightbox_display/public/key_figures/climate_data_set/ljo_scripps.png?itok=yiWoqhq1 Those who use a resource surely expect to pay for it - not doing so is freeloading.
是的,现在氧气是越来越少了,CO2逐渐升高而氧氮比也在改变。这里有一个图说明:
https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/sites/default/files/styles/node_lightbox_display/public/key_figures/climate_data_set/ljo_scripps.png?itok=yiWoqhq1
那些使用化学燃料的应该为此付钱,没有什么是可以不劳而获的。
-------------译者:恭-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
Mazter
Hiya. It'll certainly be interesting to see what happens. At the very least if there is an increase then it'll be less than would have been expected 4 or 5 yrs ago. So going in the right direction but maybe not fast enough. It could certainly be a lot worse.
看来将会发生什么有趣的事。至少,如果有增长的话,那将比4年前或5年前预计的要少。所以要往正确的方向走,但有可能不够快。这显然会差很多。
Wolframite
Venezuela was in trouble before the oil prices collapsed and the socialists were having to spend so much money subsidizing the poor they not only got a lot more of it the didn't have the money to spend on the oil producing infrastructure.
委内瑞拉在石油价格暴跌之前陷入困境,而社会主义者不得不花很多钱去补贴穷人,不仅穷人越来越多,而且现在都没钱投资石油生产基建了。
Wolframite
Has the amount of Oxygen in the air been depleted? No? Then what is the basis for the bill?
空气中的氧气量已经耗尽了吗?没有?那么什么是这张票据的依据?
-------------译者:恭-审核者:龙腾翻译总管------------
Wolframite
I know they play fast and loose with the definition of the word "subsidy".
他们在玩弄“补贴”这个概念。
ContextIsKing
Umm do you know how to navigate or search? www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2016/12/31/How-Large-Are-Global-Energy-Subsidies-42940
你知道怎么导航或者搜索吗?www.imf.org/en/publications/wp/issues/2016/12/31/how-large-are-global-energy-subsidies-42940
ellaquint
Evidence for your claim? Renewable energy happens to be my area of expertise and as far as I am aware your claim is inaccurate. However as an engineer I appreciate peer reviewed evidence and the scientific method so by all means. Enlighten me.
你这个说法的证据呢?可再生能源恰好是我的专长领域,据我所知,你的说法是不准确的。然而,作为一名工程师,我很欣赏同行用经过推敲的证据和科学方法来开导我。
我们致力于传递世界各地老百姓最真实、最直接、最详尽的对中国的看法
【版权与免责声明】如发现内容存在版权问题,烦请提供相关信息发邮件,
我们将及时沟通与处理。本站内容除非来源注明五毛网,否则均为网友转载,涉及言论、版权与本站无关。
本文仅代表作者观点,不代表本站立场。
本文来自网络,如有侵权及时联系本网站。
最近,新冠肺炎疫情在日本有扩大的趋势,有专家呼吁日本应当举国行动起来,共...
最近,新冠肺炎疫情在日本有扩大的趋势,有专家呼吁日本应当举国行动起来,共...