PBS高端访谈:今年的巴黎气候大会与往年有何不同呢?

 　　GWEN IFILL: The climate talks over the next two weeks are expected to become a turning point in the global debate over addressing the causes of a rapidly warming planet.

　　The lofty speeches have already begun, but what do leaders gathering¹ in Paris this week hope to accomplish? And what could get in the way?

　　We check in with Seth Borenstein, a science writer for the Associated Press. He joins us tonight from Paris. And Michael Levi is with the Council on Foreign Relations. He's the director of its Program on Energy, Security and Climate Change.

　　Gentlemen, welcome to you both.

　　Seth Borenstein, what are all these nations gathered in one place hoping to accomplish this time?

　　今年的巴黎气候大会与往年有何不同?

　　SETH BORENSTEIN, Associated Press: Well, this time, they're hoping to come up with some kind of deal, a binding² deal that could reduce the amount of carbon emissions³ coming from fossil-burning fossil fuels. They have tried year after year, and have failed year after year in the past.

　　GWEN IFILL: When you say binding, I just want you to clarify that. Do you mean binding on nations to hit certain targets, binding on nations to come up with certain amount of money? Binding in what way?

　　SETH BORENSTEIN: That's the key question.

　　Everyone says they want something binding, but it's sort of, what do you mean by binding? And that's one of the issues that's going to be hashed out here. It does involve lots of new money, billions of dollars, if not eventually trillions. It involves all these nations; 181 nations have made pledges: Here's what we're going to do individually.

　　Now the binding part is holding them to these pledges, a system to monitor these pledges, and perhaps, if you're not reaching these pledges, what do you do? And then it's all got to be designed so that it doesn't go through the U.S. Senate, because it can't go through the U.S. Senate because of American politics.

　　GWEN IFILL: And American politics means that that requires a two-thirds ratification⁴ in the U.S. Senate, and that's unlikely to happen.

　　I want to ask Michael Levi about what we have seen in the past. We have been to these meetings before in Cancun and in Rio and Kyoto and Copenhagen. Is this one any different?

　　MICHAEL LEVI, Council on Foreign Relations: I think this one is different.

　　I think it's different because we're starting to set realistic goals for what these summits can accomplish. We used to go to these expecting to take a global emissions cut that everyone needed to reach and negotiate over how to divide it up, then everyone would go home and execute that.

　　It was kind of like old-style arms control negotiations⁵. I would get rid of this many missiles. You would get rid of that many. We would go home, we would do it. It turns out that climate change isn't like that. Leaders can agree to whatever they want, but actually changing the energy economy is incredibly difficult.

　　And it's a lot more like a domestic policy problem, a domestic politics problem than it is like a traditional foreign policy, national security issue.

　　So, what's different this time is that, instead of putting the burden on Paris to solve the problem, negotiators are asking, how can we build an international agreement that helps countries solve the problem themselves? How do we help them cut their emissions more deeply? How do we help them adapt to climate change?

　　I think that makes this fundamentally different.

　　GWEN IFILL: Would you say — Mr. Borenstein just talked about the money which has to be committed here. What would you say would be the potential major sticking point in the next 11 days?

　　MICHAEL LEVI: I think the biggest sticking point is likely to be over money.

　　When we saw the clash in Copenhagen six years ago, the ultimate turning point was over money. This is money that comes from wealthier countries to help poorer countries adapt to climate change, deal with the damages caused by climate change, and transition their energy economies.

　　And it speaks to a basic political reality, which is, if you're from a poor country and you go home from the climate summit, and you say, we have got some pledges, countries are going to take action in the next 10 years, and that's going to help us avoid dangerous climate change in the next 50, your people are going to look at you and say, what does that mean to me today?

　　If you come back with pledges of aid, in addition, then that's a stronger political proposition. If you look at the basic politics of how this works, it leads you to money.

　　GWEN IFILL: Seth Borenstein, we did hear, speaking of money, today we heard private sector⁶ giants with names like Gates and Bezos and Zuckerberg promise to make a commitment to a green energy fund. Does that change this in any way? Or is this something for the U.S. to trumpet⁷?

　　SETH BORENSTEIN: This is something quite a bit different than in previous years.

　　You are seeing — and this has happened in the last couple of years, but it's especially happening now — private industry money, business is — they're stepping up and they're probably doing more than many countries, and that's helping⁸.

　　They're seeing sort of the reality of the economics and climate change. And they're saying, if we're going to — if you're going to do something, let us volunteer, instead of you impose, and let us help do something with technology.

　　So, I mean, what you're looking at is both technology and business are dramatically different than, let's say, 1997 in Kyoto. Those are two of the biggest reasons why many people are optimistic this time, because the technology is so different, has improved so much, and your — and the business community, much of the business community is on board now.

　　GWEN IFILL: OK. Well, we will be watching all this very closely…GWEN IFILL: … as I'm sure you will too.

　　Seth Borenstein of the Associated Press and Michael Levi of the Council on Foreign Relations, thank you both.

　　MICHAEL LEVI: Thank you.

　　SETH BORENSTEIN: My pleasure.

 

1 gathering   

n.集会，聚会，聚集

参考例句：

• He called on Mr. White to speak at the gathering.他请怀特先生在集会上讲话。
• He is on the wing gathering material for his novels.他正忙于为他的小说收集资料。

2 binding   

有约束力的，有效的，应遵守的

参考例句：

• The contract was not signed and has no binding force. 合同没有签署因而没有约束力。
• Both sides have agreed that the arbitration will be binding. 双方都赞同仲裁具有约束力。

3 emissions   

排放物( emission的名词复数 )； 散发物（尤指气体）

参考例句：

• Most scientists accept that climate change is linked to carbon emissions. 大多数科学家都相信气候变化与排放的含碳气体有关。
• Dangerous emissions radiate from plutonium. 危险的辐射物从钚放散出来。

4 ratification   

n.批准，认可

参考例句：

• The treaty is awaiting ratification.条约正等待批准。
• The treaty is subject to ratification.此条约经批准后才能生效。

5 negotiations   

协商( negotiation的名词复数 )； 谈判； 完成（难事）； 通过

参考例句：

• negotiations for a durable peace 为持久和平而进行的谈判
• Negotiations have failed to establish any middle ground. 谈判未能达成任何妥协。

6 sector   

n.部门，部分；防御地段，防区；扇形

参考例句：

• The export sector will aid the economic recovery. 出口产业将促进经济复苏。
• The enemy have attacked the British sector.敌人已进攻英国防区。

7 trumpet   

n.喇叭，喇叭声；v.吹喇叭，吹嘘

参考例句：

• He plays the violin, but I play the trumpet.他拉提琴，我吹喇叭。
• The trumpet sounded for battle.战斗的号角吹响了。

8 helping   

n.食物的一份&adj.帮助人的，辅助的

参考例句：

• The poor children regularly pony up for a second helping of my hamburger. 那些可怜的孩子们总是要求我把我的汉堡包再给他们一份。
• By doing this, they may at times be helping to restore competition. 这样一来, 他在某些时候,有助于竞争的加强。