Name: Christine Lau (17)
Vanessa Lee (18)
Class: F: 3B
EPA News Report
Christine: Vanessa, Have you heard about the Climate Summit(氣候峰會)
currently being held in Copenhagen(哥本哈根)?
Vanessa: Ng…not very clear about this. Is it something related to finding
ways to deter global warming?
Christine: Oh, yes. The objectives of the Climate Summit are to find ways
to cut down carbon emissions(射出物), and solicit(請求) funds to help the poor
nations to save their nations. It involves many countries, both rich and poor,
producers and sufferers of global warming.
Vanessa: So, it seems that the results of this Summit will have a life-or-death
impact on people in Asia and around the world.
Christine: Yes, climate change is already causing deaths, and it is no
exaggeration(誇張) to say that more lives will be lost if a pro-poor(助長貧困的)
outcome is not reached. People in Asia are at particular risk, as it is the
world's most disaster-prone (易於發生災難的) region, and home to the majority
of the world's poor people.
Vanessa:
Then, it is vital that the United Nations can secure (保衛) a fair and
binding climate deal amongst different nations.
so far?
Christine:
It’s much easy to say than done.
So, any consensus reached
On the subject of how much
and who should be compensated, there are different views. On one side,
China delegate (代表)said earlier that rich countries like the United States, one
of the world’s largest carbon polluters had a duty to pay compensation to
poorer developing countries. On the other hand, US said that China would
not be at the top of any US list of countries receiving compensation.
Regarding another major topic of how much carbon emission should be cut
down at each nation, there are major gaps to be bridged.
Vanessa: Why can’t the US and China reaches an agreement? Ah…. I think
there much be conflict of interest as they both don’t want to pay.
Christine: Well, or it should relate to securing own nation’s interest. So
it’s anticipated (預期) that the two superpowers need to find common ground
before concrete(固結) decision can be made.
Christine: First of all, I agree that the binding emission reduction targets for
rich countries should be aggressive, say at least a 40 percent cut in domestic
emissions by 2020 relative to 1990 levels, otherwise it won’t be effective.
Secondly, meaningful financial support to help poor countries to both adapt to
the impact of changing climates, and to help them reduce emissions.
Vanessa: I disagree with you because I think China is rich enough to handle
this problem. Besides, it is difficult that the rich countries promise to reduce a
high level of carbon emission. I think the poor countries also have to take the
responsibility as they also produce carbon emission. They can contribute at
those protections as well.
Vanessa: If I were the Government, I could help by convincing the leaders
representing us that it is in their own interests, in the interests of their nations
and their people, and in the interests of all our children, to overcome obstacles
(障礙).
Christine:
I agree.
Vanessa: Moreover, for rich countries, instead of paying compensation, they
can provide more financial help, for example, they can invest in technology
development in order to invest some renewable energy resources like
hydroelectric power and solar power in the poor countries. These replace the
natural resources such as coal and oil which would produce less combustion
of fossil fuels.
Christine: I personally suggest that we should play our own part. I believe that
if we participate in environmental protection daily, the problems will be
minimized.
Vanessa: Christine, I agree with you. It is about time. Let’s go back to have
lesson.