評(píng)論
打印
“Particulate matter is extremely harmful and it leads to a large number of premature deaths,”
“微粒物質(zhì)危害極大，會(huì)導(dǎo)致大量人口早逝，”
said Richard L. Revesz, an expert in environmental law at New York University.
紐約大學(xué)環(huán)境法專(zhuān)家查理·里弗斯說(shuō)道。
He called the expected change a “monumental departure”
他稱(chēng)這一預(yù)料之中的變化
from the approach both Republican and Democratic E.P.A. leaders have used over the past several decades
“嚴(yán)重背離”了環(huán)保署過(guò)去數(shù)十年來(lái)橫跨兩黨的各屆領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人一直沿用的方法，
and predicted that it would lay the groundwork for weakening more environmental regulations.
他還預(yù)測(cè)，這一改變將奠定下日后撼動(dòng)其他環(huán)保規(guī)定的基礎(chǔ)。
“It could be an enormously significant impact,” Mr. Revesz said.
“可能因此造成巨大的影響，”里弗斯說(shuō)。
The Obama administration had sought to reduce planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Power Plan
奧巴馬政府曾試圖通過(guò)清潔能源計(jì)劃推動(dòng)公用事業(yè)公司脫離煤炭，
by pushing utilities to switch away from coal and instead use natural gas or renewable energy to generate electricity.
轉(zhuǎn)用天然氣或可再生能源發(fā)電，籍此減少溫室氣體的排放。
The Obama plan would also have what is known as a co-benefit: levels of fine particulate matter would fall.
這一方案還能帶來(lái)一大衍生利益：降低細(xì)顆粒物的水平。
The Trump administration has moved to repeal the Obama-era plan and replace it with the Affordable Clean Energy rule,
特朗普政府廢除了奧巴馬執(zhí)政時(shí)期的這一方案，代之以“平價(jià)清潔能源”規(guī)定，
which would slightly improve the efficiency of coal plants.
在該規(guī)定下，燃煤電廠的效率會(huì)稍有提高。
It would also allow older coal plants to remain in operation longer and result in an increase of particulate matter.
但該規(guī)定允許老舊的燃煤電廠繼續(xù)運(yùn)營(yíng)，勢(shì)必增加空氣中顆粒物的含量。
Particulate matter comes in various sizes.
顆粒物有各種大小。
The greatest health risk comes from what is known as PM 2.5, the range of fine particles that are less than 2.5 microns in diameter.
其中，對(duì)健康威脅最大的是pm2.5，即直徑小于2.5μm的細(xì)顆粒物。
That is about one-thirtieth the width of a human hair.
這一直徑大致相當(dāng)于人類(lèi)頭發(fā)寬度的三十分之一。
The E.P.A. has set the safety threshold for PM 2.5 at a yearly average of 12 micrograms per cubic meter.
環(huán)保署給pm2.5設(shè)置的濃度限值為年平均濃度12μg/m3。
While individual days vary, with some higher,
雖然個(gè)別天數(shù)有所不同，有時(shí)更高，
an annual average at or below that level, known as the particulate matter standard, is considered safe.
但年平均水平處于或低于該水平(即顆粒物標(biāo)準(zhǔn))時(shí)，空氣質(zhì)量即為優(yōu)。
However, the agency still weighs health hazards that occur in the safe range when it analyzes new regulations.
然而，該機(jī)構(gòu)在分析新法規(guī)時(shí)，還是會(huì)考察處于安全范圍內(nèi)的顆粒水平的健康危害。
Industry has long questioned that system.
長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)，業(yè)界對(duì)這一制度一直存有疑慮。
After all, fossil fuel advocates ask,
畢竟，倡導(dǎo)使用化石燃料的人群會(huì)問(wèn)，
why should the E.P.A. search for health dangers, and, ultimately, impose costs on industry,
官方已經(jīng)認(rèn)定空氣質(zhì)量安全，
in situations where air is officially considered safe?
環(huán)保署為何還要繼續(xù)查找健康危險(xiǎn)，給行業(yè)增加成本?
Mr. Wehrum, who worked as a lawyer and lobbyist
韋魯姆曾為化工企業(yè)和化石燃料企業(yè)擔(dān)任律師和說(shuō)客，
for chemical manufacturers and fossil fuel businesses before moving to the E.P.A.,
后來(lái)加入了環(huán)保署，
echoed that position in two interviews.
他在兩次采訪中都曾表達(dá)這一觀點(diǎn)。
He noted that, in some regulations, the benefits of reduced particulate matter have been estimated to total in the range of $40 billion.
他指出，某些法規(guī)預(yù)計(jì)，減少顆粒物能帶來(lái)總價(jià)值400億美元左右的好處。
“How in the world can you get $30 or $40 billion of benefit to public health
“當(dāng)那三四百億的好處大部分都應(yīng)歸功于某些指數(shù)的降低，
when most of that is attributable to reductions in areas that already meet a health-based standard,” he said.
而那些指數(shù)本就已達(dá)到以人類(lèi)健康為尺度設(shè)置的空氣質(zhì)量標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的要求的情況下，你怎么能說(shuō)那是新法規(guī)在公共衛(wèi)生領(lǐng)域取得的成效呢？”
“That doesn’t make any sense.”
“根本說(shuō)不通嘛?！?/p>
譯文由可可原創(chuàng)，僅供學(xué)習(xí)交流使用，未經(jīng)許可請(qǐng)勿轉(zhuǎn)載。
