Two years ago, a Danish environmentalist called Bjorn Lomborg had an idea. We all want to makethe world a better place but, given finite resources, we should look for the most cost-effective ways ofdoing so. He persuaded a bunch of economists, including three Nobel laureates, to draw up a list ofpriorities. They found that efforts to fight malnutrition and disease would save many lives at modestexpense, whereas fighting global warming would cost a colossal amount and yield distant and uncertainrewards.
That conclusion upset a lot of environmentalists. This week, another man who upsets a lot of peopleembraced it. John Bolton, America’s ambassador to the United Nations, said that Mr Lomborg’ sCopenhagen Consensus provided a useful way for the world body to get its priorities straight. Too oftenat the UN, said Mr Bolton, everything is a priority. The secretary-general is charged with carrying out9,000 mandates, he said, and when you have 9,000 priorities you have none.
So, over the weekend, Mr Bolton sat down with UN diplomats from seven other countries to rank40 ways of tackling ten global crises. The problems addressed were climate change, communicablediseases, war, education, financial instability, governance, malnutrition, migration, clean water andtrade barriers.
Given a notional $ 50 billion, how would the ambassadors spend it to make the world a better place?Their conclusions were strikingly similar to the Copenhagen Consensus. After hearing presentations fromexperts on each problem, they drew up a list of priorities. The top four were basic health care, betterwater and sanitation, more schools and better nutrition for children. Averting climate change came last.
The ambassadors thought it wiser to spend money on things they knew would work. Promotingbreast-feeding, for example, costs very little and is proven to save lives. It also helps infants grow upstronger and more intelligent, which means they wilt earn more as adults. Vitamin A supplements cost aslittle as $1, save lives and stop people from going blind. And so on.
For climate change, the trouble is that though few dispute that it is occurring, no one knows howsevere it will be or what damage it will cause. And the proposed solutions are staggeringly expensive.
Mr Lomborg reckons that the benefits of implementing the Kyoto protocol would probably outweigh thecosts, but not until 2100. This calculation will not please A1 Gore. Nipped at the post by George Bushin 2000, Mr Gore calls global warming an onrushing catastrophe and argues vigorously that curbing itis the most urgent moral challenge facing mankind.
Mr Lomborg demurs. We need to realise that there are many inconvenient truths, he says. Butwhether he and Mr Bolton can persuade the UN of this remains to be seen. [460 words]
1. According to some economists, fighting global warming
A. is of little help to make the world a better place
B. is as favorable as fighting malnutrition and disease
C. is not the first priority for us to make the world better
D. is one of the priorities for us to make the world better
2. By saying everything is a priority, John Bolton means that
A. it is reasonable to think of fighting global warming as a priority
B. if you thought that way, there would be no priority at all
C. it is a useful way for the UN to get its priorities straight
D. every mandate to be carried out is actually a priority
3. According to some UN diplomats,
A. fighting global warming is worth spending a huge amount of money on
B. promoting breast-feeding is more urgent than fighting global warming
C. averting climate change should be excluded from the list of priorities
D. there are at least 40 effective ways to tackle the top ten global crises
4. Accordint to the text, Mr Lomborg
A. doubts whether climate change is occurring
B. proposes an ideal solution for climate change
C. knows clearly how severe the future climate change will be
D. questions the immediate benefits of averting climate change
5. It seems that the UN
A. still takes averting climate change as a priority
B. fails to realize many inconvenient truths in the world
C. has its crucial policies challenged by many member countries
D. is trying to tackle all the global crises to make the world better
難句透析
①we all want to make the world a better place but，given finite resources，we should look for the most costeffective ways of doing so．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】本句是由用逗號和“but”連接的兩個(gè)分句組成的并列句。在第二個(gè)分句中，過去分詞短語“given finite resources”用做狀語。
【釋義】我們都希望世界變得更美好。但是，由于資源有限，我們應(yīng)該尋找成本效益的方法去實(shí)現(xiàn)我們的愿望。②They found[that”efforts to fight malnutrition and disease would save many lives at modest expense，whereas”fighting global warming would cost a colossal amount and yield distant and uncertain rewards]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】（考試大）方括號所標(biāo)示的“that efforts…expense，whereas fighting…rewards”是“found”的賓語從句。這個(gè)賓語從句是由用逗號和“whereas”連接的兩個(gè)分句組成的并列句。
【釋義】他們發(fā)現(xiàn)，在抗擊營養(yǎng)不良和疾病方面無須太高昂費(fèi)用就能拯救許多生命，而抗擊全球變暖將需巨額經(jīng)費(fèi)。至于能有什么回報(bào)卻是長遠(yuǎn)的事，難以預(yù)測。
③For climate change，the trouble is Ithat(though few dispute(that it is occurring))t no one knows(how Severe it will be)or(what damage it will cause)]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】方括號所標(biāo)示的“that…no one knows…cause”是表語從句。圓括號所標(biāo)示的“though few dispute…”是其中的讓步狀語從句。圓括號所標(biāo)示的“how severe it will be”和“what damage it will cause”是“knows”的賓語從句。
【釋義】至于氣候變化，問題在于，雖然沒什么爭議，但是,沒有人知道這種變化會(huì)多么嚴(yán)重，或者會(huì)造成什么損失。④Mr Lomborg reckons[that the benefits of implementing the Kyoto protocol would probably outweigh the COSTS， but not until za003．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】（考試大）方括號所標(biāo)示的“that the benefits…but not until 2100”是“reckons”的賓語從句。
【釋義】隆伯格先生承認(rèn)，執(zhí)行《京都議定書》獲得的收益可能會(huì)超過所花費(fèi)的代價(jià)，但是，2100年前還不行。
⑤[Nipped at the post by George Bush in 2000]，Mr Gore”calls global warming an“onrushing catastrophe”and”argues vigorously[that curbing it is the most urgent moral challenge facing mankind]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】方括號所標(biāo)示的過去分詞短語“Nipped at…in 2000”用于說明主語“Mr Gore”。本句的主句有兩個(gè)并列的謂語動(dòng)詞“calls”和“argues”。方括號所標(biāo)示的“that curbing it…mankind”是“argues”的賓語從句，動(dòng)名詞短語“curbing it”是其中的主語，代詞“it”指“global warming”。 考試大．examda
【釋義】在與喬治·布什2000年的美國總統(tǒng)競選中，戈?duì)柊讶蜃兣Q之為“逐步緊逼的災(zāi)難”。他大聲疾呼，抑制全球變暖是人類面對的最緊迫的道德挑戰(zhàn)。全文翻譯：
兩年前，丹麥環(huán)境保護(hù)學(xué)家伯楊·隆伯格萌生了一個(gè)念頭。我們都希望世界變得更美好。但是，由于資源有限，我們應(yīng)該尋找成本效益的方法去實(shí)現(xiàn)我們的愿望。于是，他勸服許多經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家，其中包括三位諾貝爾獎(jiǎng)得主，共同草擬了一份優(yōu)先建設(shè)項(xiàng)目列表。他們發(fā)現(xiàn)，在抗擊營養(yǎng)不良和疾病方面無須太高昂費(fèi)用就能拯救許多生命，而抗擊全球變暖將需巨額經(jīng)費(fèi)，至于能有什么回報(bào)卻是長遠(yuǎn)的事，難以預(yù)測。
以上的結(jié)果令大批環(huán)境保護(hù)者大失所望。本周，另一個(gè)讓大家黯然神傷的人對他們的行動(dòng)表示贊同，他就是美國駐聯(lián)合國大使約翰·博爾頓。他聲稱，隆伯格先生的“哥本哈根共識”為全世界各機(jī)構(gòu)直接了解該優(yōu)先建設(shè)項(xiàng)目提供了一個(gè)有效的方法。他還表示，在聯(lián)合國，“所有的事都是優(yōu)先項(xiàng)目”是經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)的局面。秘書長負(fù)責(zé)執(zhí)行9000多道委任命令，當(dāng)一個(gè)人擁有9000多個(gè)優(yōu)先權(quán)時(shí)，他實(shí)質(zhì)上一個(gè)都沒有。
本周末，博爾頓先生與來自其他7個(gè)國家的聯(lián)合國外交官面對面列出解決全球10大危機(jī)的40種方法。商議的問題包括：氣候變化、傳染病、戰(zhàn)爭、教育、金融動(dòng)蕩、統(tǒng)制管理、營養(yǎng)不良、移民、清潔水資源以及貿(mào)易壁壘。
假設(shè)有500億美金，大使們會(huì)如何支配使世界變得更加美好?他們得出的結(jié)論與哥本哈根共識驚人地相似。在聆聽了每個(gè)問題相關(guān)專家的陳述后，他們擬出一份優(yōu)先級列表。排列在前四位的依次是：基礎(chǔ)衛(wèi)生保健、改善水質(zhì)和衛(wèi)生設(shè)施、建設(shè)更多學(xué)校以及孩子們更好的營養(yǎng)。氣候變化的措施排在最后。
大使們認(rèn)為把錢花在確定有效的事情上是更為明智的選擇。例如，倡導(dǎo)母乳喂養(yǎng)耗資微乎其微但被證實(shí)的確可以挽救生命。母乳喂養(yǎng)還可以使嬰兒更加強(qiáng)壯、更加聰明地生長，這也意味著他們成人后收入將更高。補(bǔ)充維生素A只需要1美金。但此舉可以防止人們失明以及挽救生命。之外還有其他好處。
至于氣候變化，問題在于，雖然沒什么爭議，但是，沒有人知道這種變化會(huì)多么嚴(yán)重，或者會(huì)造成什么損失。同時(shí)，提議用來解決這個(gè)問題的方法耗資十分巨大。隆伯格先生承認(rèn)，執(zhí)行《京都議定書》獲得的收益可能會(huì)超過所花費(fèi)的代價(jià)。但是，2100年前還不行。這個(gè)結(jié)果將會(huì)使戈?duì)柌粣?。在與喬治·布什2000年的美國總統(tǒng)競選中，戈?duì)柊讶蜃兣Q之為“逐步緊逼的災(zāi)難”。他大聲疾呼，抑制全球變暖是人類面對的最緊迫的道德挑戰(zhàn)。
隆伯格先生對此并不贊同，他說：“我們應(yīng)該意識到的確存在許多不便言明的真相?！钡c博爾頓先生是否能說服聯(lián)合國，我們還得拭目以待。
超綱詞匯
protocol n．(條約)草案，草約；(外交)議定書
avert vt．避免，防止
laureate n．戴桂冠的人
demur 反對，表示異議，遲疑
notiona adj 概念上的，想象的，象征的
Copenhagen n．哥本哈根
colossal adj．巨大的，龐大的
nip vt．箝，擠，壓縮
governance n．統(tǒng)治，管理，控制
mandate n．委托，委任，授權(quán)
staggeringly adv．搖晃地，蹣跚地
bunch n．一群，一幫
curb vt．抑制，控制
consensus n．意見一致，多數(shù)人的意見，輿論
malnutrition n．營養(yǎng)失調(diào)，營養(yǎng)不良
參考答案：1．C 2．B 3．B 4．D 5．A
That conclusion upset a lot of environmentalists. This week, another man who upsets a lot of peopleembraced it. John Bolton, America’s ambassador to the United Nations, said that Mr Lomborg’ sCopenhagen Consensus provided a useful way for the world body to get its priorities straight. Too oftenat the UN, said Mr Bolton, everything is a priority. The secretary-general is charged with carrying out9,000 mandates, he said, and when you have 9,000 priorities you have none.
So, over the weekend, Mr Bolton sat down with UN diplomats from seven other countries to rank40 ways of tackling ten global crises. The problems addressed were climate change, communicablediseases, war, education, financial instability, governance, malnutrition, migration, clean water andtrade barriers.
Given a notional $ 50 billion, how would the ambassadors spend it to make the world a better place?Their conclusions were strikingly similar to the Copenhagen Consensus. After hearing presentations fromexperts on each problem, they drew up a list of priorities. The top four were basic health care, betterwater and sanitation, more schools and better nutrition for children. Averting climate change came last.
The ambassadors thought it wiser to spend money on things they knew would work. Promotingbreast-feeding, for example, costs very little and is proven to save lives. It also helps infants grow upstronger and more intelligent, which means they wilt earn more as adults. Vitamin A supplements cost aslittle as $1, save lives and stop people from going blind. And so on.
For climate change, the trouble is that though few dispute that it is occurring, no one knows howsevere it will be or what damage it will cause. And the proposed solutions are staggeringly expensive.
Mr Lomborg reckons that the benefits of implementing the Kyoto protocol would probably outweigh thecosts, but not until 2100. This calculation will not please A1 Gore. Nipped at the post by George Bushin 2000, Mr Gore calls global warming an onrushing catastrophe and argues vigorously that curbing itis the most urgent moral challenge facing mankind.
Mr Lomborg demurs. We need to realise that there are many inconvenient truths, he says. Butwhether he and Mr Bolton can persuade the UN of this remains to be seen. [460 words]
1. According to some economists, fighting global warming
A. is of little help to make the world a better place
B. is as favorable as fighting malnutrition and disease
C. is not the first priority for us to make the world better
D. is one of the priorities for us to make the world better
2. By saying everything is a priority, John Bolton means that
A. it is reasonable to think of fighting global warming as a priority
B. if you thought that way, there would be no priority at all
C. it is a useful way for the UN to get its priorities straight
D. every mandate to be carried out is actually a priority
3. According to some UN diplomats,
A. fighting global warming is worth spending a huge amount of money on
B. promoting breast-feeding is more urgent than fighting global warming
C. averting climate change should be excluded from the list of priorities
D. there are at least 40 effective ways to tackle the top ten global crises
4. Accordint to the text, Mr Lomborg
A. doubts whether climate change is occurring
B. proposes an ideal solution for climate change
C. knows clearly how severe the future climate change will be
D. questions the immediate benefits of averting climate change
5. It seems that the UN
A. still takes averting climate change as a priority
B. fails to realize many inconvenient truths in the world
C. has its crucial policies challenged by many member countries
D. is trying to tackle all the global crises to make the world better
難句透析
①we all want to make the world a better place but，given finite resources，we should look for the most costeffective ways of doing so．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】本句是由用逗號和“but”連接的兩個(gè)分句組成的并列句。在第二個(gè)分句中，過去分詞短語“given finite resources”用做狀語。
【釋義】我們都希望世界變得更美好。但是，由于資源有限，我們應(yīng)該尋找成本效益的方法去實(shí)現(xiàn)我們的愿望。②They found[that”efforts to fight malnutrition and disease would save many lives at modest expense，whereas”fighting global warming would cost a colossal amount and yield distant and uncertain rewards]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】（考試大）方括號所標(biāo)示的“that efforts…expense，whereas fighting…rewards”是“found”的賓語從句。這個(gè)賓語從句是由用逗號和“whereas”連接的兩個(gè)分句組成的并列句。
【釋義】他們發(fā)現(xiàn)，在抗擊營養(yǎng)不良和疾病方面無須太高昂費(fèi)用就能拯救許多生命，而抗擊全球變暖將需巨額經(jīng)費(fèi)。至于能有什么回報(bào)卻是長遠(yuǎn)的事，難以預(yù)測。
③For climate change，the trouble is Ithat(though few dispute(that it is occurring))t no one knows(how Severe it will be)or(what damage it will cause)]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】方括號所標(biāo)示的“that…no one knows…cause”是表語從句。圓括號所標(biāo)示的“though few dispute…”是其中的讓步狀語從句。圓括號所標(biāo)示的“how severe it will be”和“what damage it will cause”是“knows”的賓語從句。
【釋義】至于氣候變化，問題在于，雖然沒什么爭議，但是,沒有人知道這種變化會(huì)多么嚴(yán)重，或者會(huì)造成什么損失。④Mr Lomborg reckons[that the benefits of implementing the Kyoto protocol would probably outweigh the COSTS， but not until za003．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】（考試大）方括號所標(biāo)示的“that the benefits…but not until 2100”是“reckons”的賓語從句。
【釋義】隆伯格先生承認(rèn)，執(zhí)行《京都議定書》獲得的收益可能會(huì)超過所花費(fèi)的代價(jià)，但是，2100年前還不行。
⑤[Nipped at the post by George Bush in 2000]，Mr Gore”calls global warming an“onrushing catastrophe”and”argues vigorously[that curbing it is the most urgent moral challenge facing mankind]．
【結(jié)構(gòu)】方括號所標(biāo)示的過去分詞短語“Nipped at…in 2000”用于說明主語“Mr Gore”。本句的主句有兩個(gè)并列的謂語動(dòng)詞“calls”和“argues”。方括號所標(biāo)示的“that curbing it…mankind”是“argues”的賓語從句，動(dòng)名詞短語“curbing it”是其中的主語，代詞“it”指“global warming”。 考試大．examda
【釋義】在與喬治·布什2000年的美國總統(tǒng)競選中，戈?duì)柊讶蜃兣Q之為“逐步緊逼的災(zāi)難”。他大聲疾呼，抑制全球變暖是人類面對的最緊迫的道德挑戰(zhàn)。全文翻譯：
兩年前，丹麥環(huán)境保護(hù)學(xué)家伯楊·隆伯格萌生了一個(gè)念頭。我們都希望世界變得更美好。但是，由于資源有限，我們應(yīng)該尋找成本效益的方法去實(shí)現(xiàn)我們的愿望。于是，他勸服許多經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家，其中包括三位諾貝爾獎(jiǎng)得主，共同草擬了一份優(yōu)先建設(shè)項(xiàng)目列表。他們發(fā)現(xiàn)，在抗擊營養(yǎng)不良和疾病方面無須太高昂費(fèi)用就能拯救許多生命，而抗擊全球變暖將需巨額經(jīng)費(fèi)，至于能有什么回報(bào)卻是長遠(yuǎn)的事，難以預(yù)測。
以上的結(jié)果令大批環(huán)境保護(hù)者大失所望。本周，另一個(gè)讓大家黯然神傷的人對他們的行動(dòng)表示贊同，他就是美國駐聯(lián)合國大使約翰·博爾頓。他聲稱，隆伯格先生的“哥本哈根共識”為全世界各機(jī)構(gòu)直接了解該優(yōu)先建設(shè)項(xiàng)目提供了一個(gè)有效的方法。他還表示，在聯(lián)合國，“所有的事都是優(yōu)先項(xiàng)目”是經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)的局面。秘書長負(fù)責(zé)執(zhí)行9000多道委任命令，當(dāng)一個(gè)人擁有9000多個(gè)優(yōu)先權(quán)時(shí)，他實(shí)質(zhì)上一個(gè)都沒有。
本周末，博爾頓先生與來自其他7個(gè)國家的聯(lián)合國外交官面對面列出解決全球10大危機(jī)的40種方法。商議的問題包括：氣候變化、傳染病、戰(zhàn)爭、教育、金融動(dòng)蕩、統(tǒng)制管理、營養(yǎng)不良、移民、清潔水資源以及貿(mào)易壁壘。
假設(shè)有500億美金，大使們會(huì)如何支配使世界變得更加美好?他們得出的結(jié)論與哥本哈根共識驚人地相似。在聆聽了每個(gè)問題相關(guān)專家的陳述后，他們擬出一份優(yōu)先級列表。排列在前四位的依次是：基礎(chǔ)衛(wèi)生保健、改善水質(zhì)和衛(wèi)生設(shè)施、建設(shè)更多學(xué)校以及孩子們更好的營養(yǎng)。氣候變化的措施排在最后。
大使們認(rèn)為把錢花在確定有效的事情上是更為明智的選擇。例如，倡導(dǎo)母乳喂養(yǎng)耗資微乎其微但被證實(shí)的確可以挽救生命。母乳喂養(yǎng)還可以使嬰兒更加強(qiáng)壯、更加聰明地生長，這也意味著他們成人后收入將更高。補(bǔ)充維生素A只需要1美金。但此舉可以防止人們失明以及挽救生命。之外還有其他好處。
至于氣候變化，問題在于，雖然沒什么爭議，但是，沒有人知道這種變化會(huì)多么嚴(yán)重，或者會(huì)造成什么損失。同時(shí)，提議用來解決這個(gè)問題的方法耗資十分巨大。隆伯格先生承認(rèn)，執(zhí)行《京都議定書》獲得的收益可能會(huì)超過所花費(fèi)的代價(jià)。但是，2100年前還不行。這個(gè)結(jié)果將會(huì)使戈?duì)柌粣?。在與喬治·布什2000年的美國總統(tǒng)競選中，戈?duì)柊讶蜃兣Q之為“逐步緊逼的災(zāi)難”。他大聲疾呼，抑制全球變暖是人類面對的最緊迫的道德挑戰(zhàn)。
隆伯格先生對此并不贊同，他說：“我們應(yīng)該意識到的確存在許多不便言明的真相?！钡c博爾頓先生是否能說服聯(lián)合國，我們還得拭目以待。
超綱詞匯
protocol n．(條約)草案，草約；(外交)議定書
avert vt．避免，防止
laureate n．戴桂冠的人
demur 反對，表示異議，遲疑
notiona adj 概念上的，想象的，象征的
Copenhagen n．哥本哈根
colossal adj．巨大的，龐大的
nip vt．箝，擠，壓縮
governance n．統(tǒng)治，管理，控制
mandate n．委托，委任，授權(quán)
staggeringly adv．搖晃地，蹣跚地
bunch n．一群，一幫
curb vt．抑制，控制
consensus n．意見一致，多數(shù)人的意見，輿論
malnutrition n．營養(yǎng)失調(diào)，營養(yǎng)不良
參考答案：1．C 2．B 3．B 4．D 5．A