美国倡导言论自由，但这个世界上本没有绝对的自由，只有相对的自由，自由言论的基础是建立在一定的政治立场上的。你并不了解历史，历史证明了中国在面对一些领土主权问题上是零容忍的。为什么当年快船老板柯林斯发表种族歧视言论的时候被终身禁止参与NBA篮球的一切活动，而莫雷的言论深深伤害了中国那数以亿计的巨大球迷群体。处理却如此不痛不痒。这是基本问题，也是最不可原谅的问题。我一个老火箭迷 从此宣布火箭不再是我的主队。Fuck off Rockets！Fuck Morey！#中国篮协暂停与nba火箭队合作##火箭总经理莫雷支持港独#
#外媒新闻语料翻译# 【第26期 修改后的译文】
A mercurial agency
WASHINGTON, DC
On December 27th, despite general merriment and a government shutdown, EPA issued its finding that Obama-era regulations on mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants were no longer “appropriate and necessary”.It is the latest in a long series of deregulatory actions taken by the Trump administration in an effort to resuscitate the limping coal industry.
In this case the timing was off. Since Barack Obama’s EPA implemented the rule in 2011, coal plants have already spent billions in compliance costs. Mercury emissions have since fallen by nearly 90%. The money cannot be unspent—and many utility operators have written to the EPA asking for the rules to be left in place. Removing the mercury rule is, however, an idée fixe of Bob Murray, a coal baron with the president’s ear for whom Andrew Wheeler, the acting administrator of the epa, once worked as both a lawyer and lobbyist.
The battle is being waged over regulatory maths. The costs of mercury pollution are hard to price, because it is difficult to put a figure on the cognitive impairment of children and fetuses due to mercury contamination. Conservative estimates put them at just $6m per year. The compliance costs for industry, however, run into the billions. So how did Obama-era EPA justify its regulation? It noted that cutting mercury emissions would also reduce power-plant emissions of fine particulate matter by 18% across the country. This stuff, which can become lodged in the lungs, causes respiratory disease and premature death. These so-called “co-benefits” were several times larger than the costs, preventing up to 11,000 premature deaths each year.
The Obama-era rule also affects emissions of 80-odd acid gases and heavy metals. Mr Wheeler’s epa does not deny the benefits of reducing these. It simply maintains that they should not be considered when costing the rule. “It’s like we pretend they’re not there. But how we can pretend that arsenic, beryllium and cancer-causing chromium doesn’t exist is beyond me,” says Ann Weeks, senior counsel at the Clean Air Task Force, an environmental group.
More recent scientific estimates suggest that even the direct effect of mercury pollution is much greater than reported in the EPA’s original analysis— perhaps as high as $4.8bn per year. This is based on better evidence of the effects of low-level mercury toxicity on intelligence and earnings. Despite the new estimates, the agency is sticking to the older, much smaller number. Mr Wheeler’s reasoning could be vulnerable to an inevitable court challenge, which would span years. For his former law-firm colleagues, all those billable hours could prove a fine Christmas present.
修改后译文
善变的环保署
华盛顿报道
12月27日, 尽管正值圣诞假期、政府停摆, 美国环保署还是宣布了一项调查结果：奥巴马时代对燃煤发电厂汞排放的规定已不再 "适用和必要"。这是特朗普政府为了振兴疲软的煤炭行业所采取的一系列废除旧规行动中的一项最新措施。
然而，这项措施推出的时机不当。自巴拉克·奥巴马治下的环保署2011年开始实施上述规定以来, 燃煤电厂付出的合规成本迄今已高达数十亿美元，汞排放量下降了近九成。这些钱不能白花---许多电力运营商也已经写信给环保署, 要求保留这些规定。然而，特朗普总统的大红人、煤炭大王鲍勃·墨瑞（Bob Murray）却认为废除汞排放规定势在必行。环保署代理署长安德鲁·惠勒（Andrew Wheeler）曾担任过墨瑞的律师和说客。
目前，国内正围绕监管数据展开一场争论。由于汞污染对儿童和胎儿认知能力的损害难以量化，因此汞污染带来的经济损失也难以确定。保守估计每年只有600万美元，但工厂的合规成本却高达数十亿美元。那么, 奥巴马治下的环保署如何证明其监管的合理性？环保署指出, 减少汞排放还将使全国范围内发电厂的细颗粒物排放量减少18%。这种物质会沉积在人的肺部，导致呼吸道疾病和过早死亡。减少细颗粒物的排放每年可防止多达11000 人过早死亡，这些所谓的 “叠加效益”要比成本多出数倍。
奥巴马时期的汞排放规定也减少了80多种酸性气体和重金属的排放。惠勒领导下的环保署并不否认减少这些有害物质排放的好处，但却坚持认为, 在计算这条规定付出的成本时不应考虑上述因素。对此，在一个名为“清洁空气任务小组”的环保组织担任高级顾问的安·威克斯（Ann Weeks）表示：“这就像让我们假装这些有害物质并不存在，但我们怎能对砷、铍和致癌的铬视而不见？ 我实在无法理解"。
最近的科学评估表明，即便是汞污染带来的直接影响，也远远大于环保署的最初分析，每年的花费也许高达48亿美元。这是基于更有力的证据计算出来的，即低剂量汞毒性对智力和收益的影响。尽管如此，环保署仍坚持使用旧数据，相比之下数额要少许多。惠勒署长的解释必然受到法庭的质疑，其过程将持续数年。对于他以前的律师事务所同事来说，按小时计算的律师费会是一份很好的圣诞礼物。
指导教师： 马继红（西南科技大学 ）
校对：陈清贵 陈压美（西南科技大学 ）
A mercurial agency
WASHINGTON, DC
On December 27th, despite general merriment and a government shutdown, EPA issued its finding that Obama-era regulations on mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants were no longer “appropriate and necessary”.It is the latest in a long series of deregulatory actions taken by the Trump administration in an effort to resuscitate the limping coal industry.
In this case the timing was off. Since Barack Obama’s EPA implemented the rule in 2011, coal plants have already spent billions in compliance costs. Mercury emissions have since fallen by nearly 90%. The money cannot be unspent—and many utility operators have written to the EPA asking for the rules to be left in place. Removing the mercury rule is, however, an idée fixe of Bob Murray, a coal baron with the president’s ear for whom Andrew Wheeler, the acting administrator of the epa, once worked as both a lawyer and lobbyist.
The battle is being waged over regulatory maths. The costs of mercury pollution are hard to price, because it is difficult to put a figure on the cognitive impairment of children and fetuses due to mercury contamination. Conservative estimates put them at just $6m per year. The compliance costs for industry, however, run into the billions. So how did Obama-era EPA justify its regulation? It noted that cutting mercury emissions would also reduce power-plant emissions of fine particulate matter by 18% across the country. This stuff, which can become lodged in the lungs, causes respiratory disease and premature death. These so-called “co-benefits” were several times larger than the costs, preventing up to 11,000 premature deaths each year.
The Obama-era rule also affects emissions of 80-odd acid gases and heavy metals. Mr Wheeler’s epa does not deny the benefits of reducing these. It simply maintains that they should not be considered when costing the rule. “It’s like we pretend they’re not there. But how we can pretend that arsenic, beryllium and cancer-causing chromium doesn’t exist is beyond me,” says Ann Weeks, senior counsel at the Clean Air Task Force, an environmental group.
More recent scientific estimates suggest that even the direct effect of mercury pollution is much greater than reported in the EPA’s original analysis— perhaps as high as $4.8bn per year. This is based on better evidence of the effects of low-level mercury toxicity on intelligence and earnings. Despite the new estimates, the agency is sticking to the older, much smaller number. Mr Wheeler’s reasoning could be vulnerable to an inevitable court challenge, which would span years. For his former law-firm colleagues, all those billable hours could prove a fine Christmas present.
修改后译文
善变的环保署
华盛顿报道
12月27日, 尽管正值圣诞假期、政府停摆, 美国环保署还是宣布了一项调查结果：奥巴马时代对燃煤发电厂汞排放的规定已不再 "适用和必要"。这是特朗普政府为了振兴疲软的煤炭行业所采取的一系列废除旧规行动中的一项最新措施。
然而，这项措施推出的时机不当。自巴拉克·奥巴马治下的环保署2011年开始实施上述规定以来, 燃煤电厂付出的合规成本迄今已高达数十亿美元，汞排放量下降了近九成。这些钱不能白花---许多电力运营商也已经写信给环保署, 要求保留这些规定。然而，特朗普总统的大红人、煤炭大王鲍勃·墨瑞（Bob Murray）却认为废除汞排放规定势在必行。环保署代理署长安德鲁·惠勒（Andrew Wheeler）曾担任过墨瑞的律师和说客。
目前，国内正围绕监管数据展开一场争论。由于汞污染对儿童和胎儿认知能力的损害难以量化，因此汞污染带来的经济损失也难以确定。保守估计每年只有600万美元，但工厂的合规成本却高达数十亿美元。那么, 奥巴马治下的环保署如何证明其监管的合理性？环保署指出, 减少汞排放还将使全国范围内发电厂的细颗粒物排放量减少18%。这种物质会沉积在人的肺部，导致呼吸道疾病和过早死亡。减少细颗粒物的排放每年可防止多达11000 人过早死亡，这些所谓的 “叠加效益”要比成本多出数倍。
奥巴马时期的汞排放规定也减少了80多种酸性气体和重金属的排放。惠勒领导下的环保署并不否认减少这些有害物质排放的好处，但却坚持认为, 在计算这条规定付出的成本时不应考虑上述因素。对此，在一个名为“清洁空气任务小组”的环保组织担任高级顾问的安·威克斯（Ann Weeks）表示：“这就像让我们假装这些有害物质并不存在，但我们怎能对砷、铍和致癌的铬视而不见？ 我实在无法理解"。
最近的科学评估表明，即便是汞污染带来的直接影响，也远远大于环保署的最初分析，每年的花费也许高达48亿美元。这是基于更有力的证据计算出来的，即低剂量汞毒性对智力和收益的影响。尽管如此，环保署仍坚持使用旧数据，相比之下数额要少许多。惠勒署长的解释必然受到法庭的质疑，其过程将持续数年。对于他以前的律师事务所同事来说，按小时计算的律师费会是一份很好的圣诞礼物。
指导教师： 马继红（西南科技大学 ）
校对：陈清贵 陈压美（西南科技大学 ）
【UO短裤25% OFF】夏日出门不用动脑筋套上+Tee就能出门，绝对的省事单品啊！只有几条短裤怎么够夏天的光脚丫和大长腿穿的？！轻松简单的短裤，和你鞋柜中的匡威，VANS，Golden Goose都是好搭档啊！入口戳https://t.cn/EX07inG
更多平价高街牛仔短裤 & Other Stories:https://t.cn/EX07inc Mango:https://t.cn/EX07inV Pixie Market:https://t.cn/EX07int
使用GoCashBack有5%返利https://t.cn/EX07inq
更多好deal戳这里https://t.cn/EX07in5
更多平价高街牛仔短裤 & Other Stories:https://t.cn/EX07inc Mango:https://t.cn/EX07inV Pixie Market:https://t.cn/EX07int
使用GoCashBack有5%返利https://t.cn/EX07inq
更多好deal戳这里https://t.cn/EX07in5
✋热门推荐