【草莓酱拌饭组】Eco. Debate--Sustainable Development--10.28

NaperyUID: 2710990

嘿咻嘿咻补作业咯~
小爪子挥挥，奉上一小部分，先冒个泡儿~

Sustainable development

About this debate

Sustainability implies stability. Development implies change. [简洁有力，排比] How can the two be reconciled? And what is the role of chemistry in that reconciliation[协调]? In a debate linked to the Annual Nobel Laureate Meeting in Lindau, Germany, which this year gathers winners of the chemistry prize, we investigate this question.

Words:
Reconcile
1.
to restore to friendship or harmony[常被动，with使和解，使和好如初]/settle, resolve —— reconcile differences;
2.
to make consistent or congruous[with使和谐一致，调和，使相符];
It was hard to reconcile his career ambitions with the needs of his children. 他很难兼顾事业上的抱负和孩子们的需要。
3.
to cause to submit to or accept something unpleasant [~ oneself/sb. to sth. 将就，妥协].
He could not reconcile himself to the prospect of losing her. 他一想到有可能失去她就觉得难以忍受。
Sustain
1.
to give support or relief or sustenance to[维持生命，生存];
to support/carry/withstand the weight/pressure of[支撑，承受住，~ your weight];
The love and support of his family sustained him during his time in prison. 家人的关爱和支持帮助他度过了狱中的岁月。
2.
to bear up under/suffer, undergo[formal, 遭受损失，受伤，遭到失败]; ~ losses of millions of dollars 遭受数以百万元的巨大损失
3.
to support by adequate proof[证明，证实].
The evidence is not detailed enough to sustain his argument. 这一证据过于笼统不足以证明他的论点。

Chemistry has an important role in bringing about any reconciliation. It can produce substitutes for things that now require expensive and polluting mineral extraction[开采/v.提炼，提取；拔出；摘录]. It can clean up effluent[污水，工业废水], including carbon dioxide that would otherwise [为了论证其importance而陈述其严重的负面影响] contribute to climate change. And it can help with the efficient capture of sunlight to make electricity and non-fossil fuels. But will that be enough? Or is "sustainable development" truly the oxymoron that it sounds?

Words:
Substitute
1.
to put or use in the place of another/to take the place of, replace[v.代替，取代 for/by/with];
Nothing can substitute for[无可替代]the advice your doctor is able to give you.
2.
A person or thing that takes the place or function of another[n.代替者，代替物 there is no substitute for 没有任何东西能取代].
The local bus service was a poor substitute for their car. 当地公共汽车比自己的汽车差远了。
Extract
1.
to obtain by much effort from someone unwilling[设法得到(不愿提供的信息、钱财等)];
2.
to get a particular feeling or quality from a situation[获得某种感觉或品质].
Extract knowledge/ pleasure/experience/information/lessons from success and failure
[从成功和失败中吸取经验教训]/assistance unparalleled in American’s relationship with other countries
[设法取得超过美国在同任何其他国家的关系中所给予的援助]
Oxymoron
1.
a combination of contradictory or incongruous words (as cruel kindness, a deafening震耳欲聋的silence) [矛盾修辞法，术语];
2.
something (as a concept) that is made up of contradictory or incongruous elements[逆喻]

NaperyUID: 2710990

Opening statements

The proposer's opening remarks
July 3rd 2009 | David G. Victor

Purpose: An argumentative paper makes a claim about a topic and justifies this claim with specific evidence.
The claim could be an opinion, a policy proposal, an evaluation, a cause-and-effect statement, or an interpretation.
The goal of the argumentative paper is to convince the audience that the claim is true based on the evidence provided.

Claim: "Sustainable development" is truly the oxymoron that it sounds.

Sustainable development is a beautiful-sounding idea that has become intellectually bankrupt and should be abandoned [thesis statement/main idea]. It leads to wrongheaded [contrary to sound judgment, 判断错误的] thinking about the real causes of economic and environmental troubles. And it encourages governments to adopt terrible policies. [Preview the rest?]

Topic: Sustainable Development
Angle: a bankrupt & abandoned => effect: wrongheaded thinking & terrible policies [necessary background info.]
Implication: Why it is a bankrupt and should it be abandoned?
                     What is the real cause of eco & environ troubles?
                     What is the specific content of those terrible policies?
Specific Type of Thought:
Cause and Effect Thought =>
1.
What are all possible reasons and/or probable effects?
2.
What details and specifics can I use to explain each reason or effect fully so that the audience will understand?

The original thinking behind sustainable development was smart and proper. [小让步，最初的想法是聪明而且合适的=>暗示现在的则是wrongheaded,与现在形成对比] Back in 1987 the Norwegian Prime Minister, Gro Brundtland, chaired a commission on economics and greenery that famously called sustainable the kind of development that "meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."[Background info: definition of SD]

In the decades since[照应上段：original], the concept of sustainable development has grown more popular because its meaning has become fuzzier [blurred,模糊不清的].[Back Info: facts = fuzzier] The problems have arisen on four fronts.

Development:
                      original smart & proper [cite authority/definition]
Comparison =>                                                                    => the thinking of SD has changed.         
                        now    fuzzier [facts]                                              [为后文论证做铺垫]

First, advocates for sustainable development have used the concept's ambiguity as a licence to embrace stasis and autonomy. There is no question that we face severe environmental challenges because we are using some resources at a rate faster than they can regenerate. [小让步+后转折] But that is hardly new: Human society, especially in the industrial eras, has always leaned hard on its resources. And we have fixed most of those problems through radical changes in technology and behaviour. Three hundred years ago analysts were terrified about a scarcity of salt needed to cure [to deal with in a way that eliminates or rectifies解决了结某问题(successfully)] foods, and reminiscent of today's oil security woes[ruinous trouble,破坏性灾难], governments created national champion companies to make their nations independent in salt. But as Mark Kurlansky's history, Salt, has shown, society fixed the salt problem mainly through innovation: canning and refrigeration, in particular. And the societies that did best in managing their salt troubles were those most open to change and international trade in ideas and technologies.

Nothing in the original idea of sustainable development mandated [order] independence and stasis. [依旧是个小让步+后转折] But as the deep greens have taken hold of the idea they have pushed it this direction. In reality, well-focused technological change is a saviour, not an evil that undermines [weaken] sustainable development. [Attitude/angle] Today's challenges, such as global warming [举例 one of the severe environmental challenges], are no different. Global warming is so huge a challenge that it seems unsolvable. But it can and will be solved the same way that society shook its dependence on salt: through new technologies and shifting to new resources.

Development:
  (fuzz)ambiguity of SD's concept(concept也在change了~) =>(contributed by the deep greens)
     stasis
     autonomy/independence

A.表面上：消耗大于再生 (所以需要实行SD)     
     => 事实上：正因为很大程度上依赖于能源，所以人们会想尽一切办法来解决这个问题
                   (环境问题并不一定是人们的过度消耗造成的，照应首段)
               1.  fix problems:through radical changes in technology and behaviour
               2.  set examples:
                    the problem of salt solved not by independence but innovation.(details:canning and refrigeration)
                    societies which did best were the most open.(contradictory to "Stasis")  

B. why different from the original?
      => the Deep Greens have pushed it to the direction of "Stasisi and Autonomy"
            (暗指：是人们自己造成SD含义的变化)
          => well-focused technological change is a saviour, not an evil that undermines sustainable development.
                 (正面说明，有针对性的科学技术改变是有益的，事实上并没有削弱SD)
                Supported by another sever environmental challenge: Globe Warming
                 (照应上段中的sever environmental challenges，同时强调了科学技术的积极影响—解决问题而不是阻碍发展)
               => through new technologies and shifting to new resources 是解决问题的好办法
                      (再次证明问题not solved by stasis & independence but changes & open)

A+B => 人们消耗过快，导致严重的环境问题
            => 正因如此，人们通过科技可解决严重的环境问题(环境问题并不一定是人们的过度消耗造成的，照应首段)
                  => changes & open 实际上是 positive & saviour，可以解决问题
                        => stasis & autonomy/independence 反而是 negative & evil
                             => the meaning of SD has changed(暗指：初衷发生变化，其积极意义值得怀疑，照应上文呀~)

The second trouble with sustainable development has arisen with future generations. Indeed, it was this aspect of Brundtland’s reports—a focus on stewardship [the conducting, supervising, or managing of something; (especially the careful and responsible)] for future generations—that garnered [to acquire by effort] the most attention. Yet on this front woolly thinking[照应上文的wrongheaded/fuzzier] has also destroyed the original idea.[转折，让步] Concern about future generations has become a one-sided game that focuses only on harms. In reality, the damage of extracting resources also produces huge benefits such as new ideas and investment in infrastructure that also pass to future generations. It has proved hard to measure and value all the goods and bads, but the assets [goods] that most generations pass to their descendants usually far exceed the liabilities [bads].

Development:
                             original thinking
A.表面上，               (without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs)         
contrast(destroyed)：  
                             woolly thinking(focus on harms -- one-sided game)

B.事实上，
over-extraction => employing new ideas & investment to infrastructure
                           (问题并不一定是人们的过度消耗造成的，照应首段)
            => pass benefits to future generations
                 supported by a fact(assets usually far exceed liabillties)

A+B => 给下一代造成的问题，可以就ideas和investment来解决
              => 实际上说明依旧是通过changes(用ideas和investment来改善infrastructure)

NaperyUID: 2710990

The third front is policy. The original concept of sustainable development encouraged policies that used resources so long as the depletion was efficient and focused on long-term investment. On that basis, societies extracted salt from the earth, depleted minerals and engaged in a host of seemingly unsustainable activities.[让步，转折] Yet they were exactly the right thing to do because they promoted economic growth that, with smart regulation, shifted our societies to other resources [actual effect]. Yet today the deep green advocates for sustainable development seek energy independence and autonomy. They are terrified of treading on any resource and thus undermine the human ingenuity that is essential for us to sustain our place on the planet.[Contradictory to original ideal]

Development:
论证的方法与上面的有些类似。
都是先小让步，再转折。
而且都是有些类似于推翻常识的那种。
从我们一般大众化的想法出发，然后笔锋一转，让我们发现原来我们以为的常识性东西竟然是有问题的。

Original(不停的出现) concept
        => depletion & extraction
             (seemingly unsustainable activities无时无刻不都在提醒咱们，他的出发点是我们认为理所当然的东东)
             => the right thing
                   (他又让步转折了，他又这么做了—咱们认为对的实际上是错的—这就是wrongheaded thinking)
                    从activities的effect来证明，它们是right的。
                    (promotion = changes, shift to other = open 开放，接受)
                     => the essential reason to sustain the society has been neglected.
                          (人们过于强调自身活动的副作用，忽视我们在面临困难时的爆发力，间接的指出人们的观点是错误的不全面的)
                           依旧是小让步指出the green deep所追求的SD
                           (要注意的是，这里强调的是the deep green所提倡的SD，间接照应上文，DP致使SD的meaning发生改变)

我觉得，作者这里无论怎么论证自己的观点，其最终的目的都是在于验证“Wrongheaded thinking”这个词上面。
论证的方法都是小让步加转折。先给点咱们甜头，后来一棒打醒咱们，这样更能加深我们的印象吧。     

Today, ground zero [the very beginning] in the sustainable development debate is so-called renewable power. Many governments are spending a fortune on the logic that if it is renewable it must be sustainable. Yet the reality is totally different. Many renewable sources may recharge their energy resources, yet they have other heavy footprints on our resources. Wind turbines, for example, are an eyesore [something offensive to view] on open spaces and wilderness. Like the oil pipelines of yesteryear, they need access roads that open landscapes to abuse, and all the power lines that carry renewable wind to markets are an extra pressure on the land. And this problem is hardly unique for wind. Disastrous[woes] renewable biofuels policies, wrapped in the deep green of sustainable development and energy independence, have caused a horror on the landscape and, some say, threaten food supplies.

Renewable: capable of being replaced by natural ecological cycles or sound management practices  
                 *renewable resources*
Sustainable: 1. of, relating to, or being a method of harvesting or using a resource so that the resource is not
                      depleted or permanently damaged  
                           *sustainable techniques*  *sustainable agriculture*
                  2. of or relating to a lifestyle involving the use of sustainable methods  
                           *sustainable society*

应该要先弄清楚这两个词的区别。摘自韦氏的解释。
renewable强调的是一种特性，即可以通过自然或者人为因素进行替换，更新；(注意后文中的recharge一词，正是说明这点)
sustainable强调的是一种方法，一种不耗尽资源或者使资源永久损耗的办法。

Development:

1. renewable 不等于 sustainable，虽然可以再生，但是仍然给人类生活造成了负面影响
    open landscapes to abuse/open landscapes to abuse
    举例论证，类比？同oil一般，照应前文中提出的oil woes
2. 通过描述其影响，暗示policies出场！  
   (一种新的energy的开发与实施，当然要靠政府出面来规范咯)
3. 然而，policies wrapped in the deep green，会最终造成horror等负面作用！
   (又一次强调the deep green，作用与上文相同)

这一段看的有点马马虎虎的。人有些困了。。。。。

For policy, what matters most is getting the accounting and the regulatory signals right. Global warming persists because barely any government has really tackled that challenge, not because societies are under spending on favored renewable energy technologies or other darlings of the deep green. Just because fossil fuels are finite does not mean that they should not be used, if married with clear and strong incentives to be frugal and to lighten their environmental footprint.

Development:
policy的目的在于 get right(显然policy由政府颁布实施)
    => 因此政府有很大的责任，但是没有多少政府采取实际的行动
         => 所以并非人们采取哪种技术的原因(问题发生的原因在于政府，呼应首段)
              也不是那些deep green所青睐的方法(间接的指出，DP的观点是错误的，又一次照应了wrongheaded thinking)               
              =>资源的有限不代表不能利用 (有限反而能促进我们想出办法解决问题：照应前文)
                  只要我们清楚强烈的意识到注意节约利用资源(指出怎样的thinking才是正确的，而不是wrongheaded，呼应前文)
                  就可以给社会环境带来正面的影响
                    (lighten their environmental footprint与上段中的have other heavy footprints on our resources形成对比，
                         也暗指我们要lighten而不是leave heavy footprints)

只要我们采取正确的方法和动机，就可以使之发挥积极效用~

Finally, sustainable development has become about greenery. But in Brundtland's sage definition it was about many other dimensions: protection of human rights, dignity and fairness. Those ideas, vague all, remain essential today. Indeed, the developing world is rightly afraid that all the greenery in the North will be an excuse to ignore these many other aspects of welfare that, in the end, are what civilization is all about.

Development:
                   now (about greenery)
A.Comparison:                                                                             
                  original(protection of human rights, dignity and fairness)

         => the essential ideas vague all
              (照应文章开始部分中的ambiguity&fuzzier，essential一词强调其重要性，暗指现在的SD已经不再smart&proper)
               => the concept of SD really changed
                                                                                                

B. Facts: 发展中国家担心发达国家以绿化作为忽略发展中国家实际文明繁荣程度的其它表现方面的借口。
                 (暗指现在SD的目的已经背离了初衷,original thinking,意味着SD的破产)

Back in 1987 sustainable development was a smart and attractive idea because nobody really knew what it meant. As I outlined in more detail in the magazine Foreign Affairs ("Recovering Sustainable Development", January 2006), the last two decades have yielded an empty debate. Intellectually and politically, sustainable development is not sustainable and has become dangerous. It should be abandoned.

NaperyUID: 2710990

素材积累：

for Issues of Environment & Tech.

红色 句型          橘色 词
蓝色 思路          绿色 词组
紫色 笔记


1.Sustainability implies stability. Development implies change.  [学习，句子简洁，表达清晰！]

2.Chemistry has an important role in bringing about any reconciliation. It can produce substitutes for things that  now require expensive and polluting mineral extraction. It can clean up effluent, including carbon dioxide that would otherwise contribute to climate change. And it can help with the efficient capture of sunlight to make electricity and non-fossil fuels. [用于陈述正面作用或积极影响]

3.Oxymoron [something (as a concept) that is made up of contradictory or incongruous elements[逆喻]]

4.Sustainable development is a beautiful-sounding idea that has become intellectually bankrupt and should be abandoned. It leads to wrongheaded thinking about the real causes of economic and environmental troubles. And it encourages governments to adopt terrible policies. [评价SD的弊端]

5.Advocates for sustainable development have used the concept's ambiguity as a licence to embrace stasis and autonomy.

6.fix a problem [解决问题]

7.a scarcity of salt needed to cure foods, reminiscent of oil security woes  [社会问题]

8.Nothing in the original idea of sustainable development mandated independence and stasis. [倒装]

9.the deep greens

10.In reality, well-focused technological change is a saviour, not an evil that undermines sustainable development.[形象的比喻]

11.Global warming is so huge a challenge that can be solved the same way that society shook its dependence on salt: through new technologies and shifting to new resources.  [科技可以解决社会问题]

12.garnered the attention [引起注意]

13.Concern about future generations has become a one-sided game that focuses only on harms. [社会问题]

14.It has proved hard to measure and value all the goods and bads, but the assets that most generations pass to their descendants usually far exceed the liabilities.  [一者的利弊比较，或者两者的利弊比较]

15.On that basis, societies extracted salt from the earth, depleted minerals and engaged in a host of seemingly unsustainable activities. [人类的过度行为]

16.They are terrified of treading on any resource and thus undermine the human ingenuity that is essential for us to sustain our place on the planet. [SD的反效果]

17.have other heavy footprints on our resources
    lighten their environmental footprint

18.Wind turbines, the oil pipelines of yesteryear

19.wrapped in

20.societies are under spending on favored renewable energy technologies or other darlings of the deep green.

21.Just because fossil fuels are finite does not mean that they should not be used, if married with clear and strong incentives to be frugal and to lighten their environmental footprint. [积极作用]

NaperyUID: 2710990

The opposition's opening remarks

With apologies to English teachers everywhere, my position to this statement is
the double negative—"sustainability is not unsustainable."
But this may be true only if we in America get a firm national grip on reality.
I focus my argument on America as it is the world's biggest economy and (with China) its worst polluter.

Topic: "sustainability”
Angle:
not unsustainable [only if get a firm national grip on reality] <= America’s biggest eco. & worst polluter.
Implication:
What are the real reasons?
Why to get a firm national grip?
Why to mention A’s biggest eco & worst polluter?

Our situation is indeed exceedingly grim—increasing release of toxins into the environment, energy gluttony and the appearance of epidemic obesity. Compounding these problems is the nearly total lack of thrift among Americans whose uncontrollable consumerism is sufficient to support multiple shopping channels on the television 24 x 7 x 365 at a time of unprecedented debt.

事实：uncontrollable consumerism
        [以比喻的方式说明这个“uncontrollable”到底是怎样的范围：sufficient to support channels of debt]
     => 问题的原因：lack of thrift
         => 问题造成的结果：release of toxins & energy gluttony & epidemic obesity [举例说明]
             => 现状：exceedingly grim [环境出现问题，暗示解决方法的出现]

最近读了几篇文章，觉得这种论证方法，真的是很好用，而且用的很多。
提出某个现象，指出其中的问题，暗示需要解决办法。
然后，偶们写作的主题就隆重登场了。

To have the world's biggest economy is irrelevant if we squander our wealth on fluff. Popular television advertising revenues alone could sustain significant educational reform in the US. Consider for example that one second of advertising during the Super Bowl retails for $100,000—twice the annual salary of a beginning schoolteacher. The wisdom behind the rising economy in China must be questioned, since they now have 3% of the world's paved roadways but 21% of the world's highway fatalities. If this truly reflects giving the public what it wants, we are most certainly doomed.

1.假设，反面论证：
   两个if句  [照应首段“最雄厚的经济实力”]
   这样的论证方法很生动，避免了老是说好好好好的枯燥，突然说如果没有了会怎么样，更加有说服力。
2.举例：
广告的收益和教师的薪资；  [照应上段中的“无法控制的消费”，隐藏含义：这样会带来环境问题]
中国的现状；
    =>need to reflect what the public want [not ad. & not high ways]
        => fail to get a national grip
           => "sustainability is not unsustainable"