“極度不負(fù)責(zé)任”:英國發(fā)放了24張新的北海石油和天然氣許可證
‘Grossly irresponsible’: UK hands out 24 new North Sea oil and gas licences譯文簡介
“當(dāng)海平面上升時,看看哪里會被洪水淹沒會很有趣,呵呵?!薄缎l(wèi)報(bào)》報(bào)道。
正文翻譯
‘Grossly irresponsible’: UK hands out 24 new North Sea oil and gas licences
-The move to grant 17 companies the right to drill for fossil fuels is ‘a(chǎn) pipe dream’ that will do little for energy security, say environmentalists
“極度不負(fù)責(zé)任”:英國發(fā)放了24張新的北海石油和天然氣許可證
——環(huán)保人士說,授予17家公司開采化石燃料的權(quán)利是“白日夢”,對能源安全沒有什么幫助
-The move to grant 17 companies the right to drill for fossil fuels is ‘a(chǎn) pipe dream’ that will do little for energy security, say environmentalists
“極度不負(fù)責(zé)任”:英國發(fā)放了24張新的北海石油和天然氣許可證
——環(huán)保人士說,授予17家公司開采化石燃料的權(quán)利是“白日夢”,對能源安全沒有什么幫助
(The North Sea regulator said 17 oil companies were granted licences in the Central North Sea, Northern North Sea and West of Shetland areas to “provide benefits to the local and wider economy”.)
(北海監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)表示,17家石油公司獲得了在北海中部、北海北部和設(shè)得蘭群島西部地區(qū)的開采許可證,以“為當(dāng)?shù)睾透鼜V泛的經(jīng)濟(jì)帶來好處”。)
新聞:
Britain has handed major oil companies the right to drill for fossil fuels in 24 new licence areas across the North Sea as part of the government’s mission to extend the life of the ageing oil and gas basin.
英國已授予各大石油公司在北海24個新許可區(qū)域開采化石燃料的權(quán)利,這是政府延長老化油氣盆地壽命的任務(wù)的一部分。
英國已授予各大石油公司在北海24個新許可區(qū)域開采化石燃料的權(quán)利,這是政府延長老化油氣盆地壽命的任務(wù)的一部分。
The North Sea regulator said 17 oil companies, including Shell and BP, were granted licences in the Central North Sea, Northern North Sea and West of Shetland areas to “provide benefits to the local and wider economy”.
北海監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)表示,包括殼牌和英國石油在內(nèi)的17家石油公司獲得了在北海中部、北海北部和設(shè)得蘭群島西部地區(qū)的開采許可證,以“為當(dāng)?shù)睾透鼜V泛的經(jīng)濟(jì)帶來好處”。
北海監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)表示,包括殼牌和英國石油在內(nèi)的17家石油公司獲得了在北海中部、北海北部和設(shè)得蘭群島西部地區(qū)的開采許可證,以“為當(dāng)?shù)睾透鼜V泛的經(jīng)濟(jì)帶來好處”。
The latest licences, which follow an initial tranche of 27 licences offered in October last year, could begin producing oil and gas before the end of the decade, according to the North Sea Transition Authority.
北海過渡管理局表示,在去年10月發(fā)放的首批27張?jiān)S可證之后,最新一批許可證(企業(yè))可能會在2030年前開始從事石油和天然氣生產(chǎn)。
北海過渡管理局表示,在去年10月發(fā)放的首批27張?jiān)S可證之后,最新一批許可證(企業(yè))可能會在2030年前開始從事石油和天然氣生產(chǎn)。
The move has angered MPs and environmental campaigners who called the move “grossly irresponsible” and accused the government of overstating the economic benefits of the North Sea and sacrificing Britain’s climate leadership for “a pipe dream”.
此舉激怒了國會議員和環(huán)保人士,他們稱此舉“非常不負(fù)責(zé)任”,并指責(zé)政府夸大了北海的經(jīng)濟(jì)效益,并為了實(shí)現(xiàn)一場“白日夢”犧牲了英國在氣候變化方面的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)地位。
此舉激怒了國會議員和環(huán)保人士,他們稱此舉“非常不負(fù)責(zé)任”,并指責(zé)政府夸大了北海的經(jīng)濟(jì)效益,并為了實(shí)現(xiàn)一場“白日夢”犧牲了英國在氣候變化方面的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)地位。
Graham Stuart, the minister for energy security and net zero, was forced to defend the government’s decision to encourage more North Sea oil and gas drilling despite signing up to a pledge to phase out fossil fuels at the Cop28 UN climate talks in December. He told MPs on the environmental audit committee that the new licences would be “good news in our transition to net zero”.
英國能源安全和凈零排放大臣格雷厄姆·斯圖爾特被迫為政府鼓勵更多北海石油和天然氣鉆探的決定辯護(hù),盡管他在去年12月舉行的聯(lián)合國氣候變化大會上簽署了一項(xiàng)逐步淘汰化石燃料的承諾。他告訴環(huán)境審計(jì)委員會的議員,新的許可證將是“我們向凈零過渡的好消息。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
英國能源安全和凈零排放大臣格雷厄姆·斯圖爾特被迫為政府鼓勵更多北海石油和天然氣鉆探的決定辯護(hù),盡管他在去年12月舉行的聯(lián)合國氣候變化大會上簽署了一項(xiàng)逐步淘汰化石燃料的承諾。他告訴環(huán)境審計(jì)委員會的議員,新的許可證將是“我們向凈零過渡的好消息。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
“If we didn’t have new oil and gas licences we would import new [liquefied natural gas] from abroad which is four times as carbon intensive as the gas produced here. I accept it’s counterintuitive but it’s not a complex argument to see it’s the right thing to do,” Stuart said. “New oil and licences strengthen our ability to get to net zero, they strengthen and support our climate leadership.”
“如果我們沒有新的石油和天然氣許可證,我們將從國外進(jìn)口新的(液化天然氣),其碳排放強(qiáng)度是國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)的天然氣的四倍。我承認(rèn)這是違反直覺的,但要證明這是正確的做法并不復(fù)雜。”斯圖爾特說。“新的石油和許可證加強(qiáng)了我們實(shí)現(xiàn)凈零排放的能力,它們加強(qiáng)和支持了我們在氣候變化方面的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)地位?!?/b>
“如果我們沒有新的石油和天然氣許可證,我們將從國外進(jìn)口新的(液化天然氣),其碳排放強(qiáng)度是國內(nèi)生產(chǎn)的天然氣的四倍。我承認(rèn)這是違反直覺的,但要證明這是正確的做法并不復(fù)雜。”斯圖爾特說。“新的石油和許可證加強(qiáng)了我們實(shí)現(xiàn)凈零排放的能力,它們加強(qiáng)和支持了我們在氣候變化方面的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)地位?!?/b>
The government has come under fierce criticism for its stated policy to extract as much oil and gas as possible from the North Sea after leading climate experts warned that fossil fuel production must end if global governments hope to curb the rise in global heating.
英國政府宣稱要從北海開采盡可能多的石油和天然氣,這一政策受到了激烈的批評。此前,主要?dú)夂驅(qū)<揖娣Q,如果各國政府希望遏制全球變暖的加劇,就必須停止化石燃料的生產(chǎn)。
英國政府宣稱要從北海開采盡可能多的石油和天然氣,這一政策受到了激烈的批評。此前,主要?dú)夂驅(qū)<揖娣Q,如果各國政府希望遏制全球變暖的加劇,就必須停止化石燃料的生產(chǎn)。
Philip Evans, a campaigner at Greenpeace UK, said: “The government knows that the fossil fuel industry is driving the climate crisis, but instead of cracking down on oil and gas giants like Shell, they’re greenlighting a new drilling frenzy in the North Sea.”
英國綠色和平組織的活動人士菲利普·埃文斯表示:“政府知道化石燃料行業(yè)正在推動氣候危機(jī),但他們非但沒有打擊殼牌這樣的石油和天然氣巨頭,反而為北海的新一輪鉆探狂潮開綠燈。”
英國綠色和平組織的活動人士菲利普·埃文斯表示:“政府知道化石燃料行業(yè)正在推動氣候危機(jī),但他們非但沒有打擊殼牌這樣的石油和天然氣巨頭,反而為北海的新一輪鉆探狂潮開綠燈。”
Critics have pointed out that the policy, which will raise billions for the Treasury in the short-term, will do little to secure Britain’s energy supplies or lower energy bills because the new licences will mostly produce oil which the UK typically exports to refineries in Europe.
批評人士指出,這項(xiàng)短期內(nèi)將為財(cái)政部籌集數(shù)十億美元資金的政策,對保障英國的能源供應(yīng)或降低能源賬單幾乎沒有什么幫助,因?yàn)樾略S可證將主要生產(chǎn)英國通常出口給歐洲煉油廠的石油。
批評人士指出,這項(xiàng)短期內(nèi)將為財(cái)政部籌集數(shù)十億美元資金的政策,對保障英國的能源供應(yīng)或降低能源賬單幾乎沒有什么幫助,因?yàn)樾略S可證將主要生產(chǎn)英國通常出口給歐洲煉油廠的石油。
Tessa Khan, the executive director of Uplift, which campaigns against fossil fuels, said: “This government is selling us a pipe dream. These new licences will do vanishingly little for the UK’s energy security and nothing to lower energy bills. In the last 13 years the government has issued hundreds of new licences, which have produced a grand total of 16 days’ worth of extra gas. And in the past decade the number of jobs supported by the oil and gas industry has more than halved.”
反對化石燃料的組織Uplift的執(zhí)行董事特莎·汗說:“這個政府正在向我們兜售一個白日夢。這些新許可證對英國的能源安全幾乎毫無幫助,對降低能源賬單也毫無幫助。在過去的13年里,政府已經(jīng)頒發(fā)了數(shù)百個新的許可證,這些許可證生產(chǎn)的額外天然氣總量只能滿足16天的需求。在過去的十年中,油氣行業(yè)提供的工作崗位減少了一半以上?!?/b>
反對化石燃料的組織Uplift的執(zhí)行董事特莎·汗說:“這個政府正在向我們兜售一個白日夢。這些新許可證對英國的能源安全幾乎毫無幫助,對降低能源賬單也毫無幫助。在過去的13年里,政府已經(jīng)頒發(fā)了數(shù)百個新的許可證,這些許可證生產(chǎn)的額外天然氣總量只能滿足16天的需求。在過去的十年中,油氣行業(yè)提供的工作崗位減少了一半以上?!?/b>
The industry’s trade group, Offshore Energies UK, said the new licensing rounds would help to provide an orderly transition for the industry, which continues to support about 120,000 jobs.
該行業(yè)貿(mào)易組織英國離岸能源公司表示,新一輪的許可證發(fā)放將有助于為該行業(yè)提供有序過渡,該行業(yè)將繼續(xù)支持約12萬個就業(yè)崗位。
該行業(yè)貿(mào)易組織英國離岸能源公司表示,新一輪的許可證發(fā)放將有助于為該行業(yè)提供有序過渡,該行業(yè)將繼續(xù)支持約12萬個就業(yè)崗位。
David Whitehouse, the chief executive of Offshore Energies UK, said: “We have over 280 oil and gas fields but by the end of the decade 180 of them will have stopped producing. We need the churn of licences for an orderly transition that supports jobs and communities across the country and meets our energy needs.”
英國離岸能源公司首席執(zhí)行官戴維·懷特豪斯表示:“我們有280多個油氣田,但到2020年,其中180個將停止生產(chǎn)。我們需要大量的許可證來實(shí)現(xiàn)有序的過渡,以支持全國各地的就業(yè)和社區(qū),并滿足我們的能源需求。”
英國離岸能源公司首席執(zhí)行官戴維·懷特豪斯表示:“我們有280多個油氣田,但到2020年,其中180個將停止生產(chǎn)。我們需要大量的許可證來實(shí)現(xiàn)有序的過渡,以支持全國各地的就業(yè)和社區(qū),并滿足我們的能源需求。”
Khan said: “What workers and the public urgently need is a government that has a coherent transition plan so workers don’t get left behind, and a laser-like focus on bringing down people’s energy bills.”
汗說:“工人和公眾迫切需要的是一個有一個連貫的過渡計(jì)劃的政府,這樣工人就不會落在后面,并且如激光一般聚焦于降低人們的能源賬單。”
汗說:“工人和公眾迫切需要的是一個有一個連貫的過渡計(jì)劃的政府,這樣工人就不會落在后面,并且如激光一般聚焦于降低人們的能源賬單。”
Bob Ward, the policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics, said: “This is grossly irresponsible and undermines the best interests of the UK. The licences will not reduce energy bills or make us more energy secure. But they will further destroy the UK’s international reputation on climate change.
倫敦政治經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)院格蘭瑟姆氣候變化與環(huán)境研究所政策與溝通主任鮑勃·沃德說:“這是非常不負(fù)責(zé)任的,損害了英國的最大利益。這些許可證不會減少能源費(fèi)用,也不會使我們的能源更加安全。但這將進(jìn)一步破壞英國在氣候變化問題上的國際聲譽(yù)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
倫敦政治經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)院格蘭瑟姆氣候變化與環(huán)境研究所政策與溝通主任鮑勃·沃德說:“這是非常不負(fù)責(zé)任的,損害了英國的最大利益。這些許可證不會減少能源費(fèi)用,也不會使我們的能源更加安全。但這將進(jìn)一步破壞英國在氣候變化問題上的國際聲譽(yù)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
“This announcement will, however, undermine the confidence of investors in alternatives to fossil fuels and reduce our competitiveness in the new sustainable industries. This also suggests that the UK government did not act in good faith when it signed up to the collective decision at the Cop28 United Nations climate change summit in Dubai in November to accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels.”
“然而,這一聲明將削弱投資者對化石燃料替代品的信心,并降低我們在新的可持續(xù)產(chǎn)業(yè)中的競爭力。這也表明,英國政府去年11月在迪拜舉行的聯(lián)合國氣候變化峰會上簽署了加速從化石燃料過渡的集體決定,卻并沒有真誠地采取行動?!?br />
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
“然而,這一聲明將削弱投資者對化石燃料替代品的信心,并降低我們在新的可持續(xù)產(chǎn)業(yè)中的競爭力。這也表明,英國政府去年11月在迪拜舉行的聯(lián)合國氣候變化峰會上簽署了加速從化石燃料過渡的集體決定,卻并沒有真誠地采取行動?!?br />
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 4 )
收藏
Hopefully they’re successful. Good for UK economy if they are.
希望他們能成功。如果能批下來,對英國經(jīng)濟(jì)有好處。
In what way? Genuinely curious.
We will get the levy tax i guess, which is good, but we won't benifit from cheaper oil and gas for our industry as it will be sold at global market rates. I'm also not sure if workers pay any taxes if they're living offshore.
I like that it gives more stability in terms of global pricing, but is it really worth the environmental impact? I am leaning towards no.
以什么方式?真的很好奇。
我猜我們將獲得稅收,這是好事,但我們不會從石油和天然氣的廉價(jià)中受益,因?yàn)槭秃吞烊粴鈱⒁匀蚴袌鰞r(jià)格出售。我也不確定居住在海外的工人是否納稅。
我喜歡它在全球定價(jià)方面提供了更多的穩(wěn)定性,但它真的值得對環(huán)境造成影響嗎?我傾向于否定。
Grossly irresponsible, we should totally just keep funding terrorism as we buy it from notorious extremist factions in the middle east.
這非常不負(fù)責(zé)任,我們應(yīng)該繼續(xù)資助恐怖主義,因?yàn)槲覀儚闹袞|臭名昭著的極端主義派別那里購買化石燃料。(反諷)
You're right, it's more responsible to get our oil and gas from Russia the Middle East
你說得對,從俄羅斯中東進(jìn)口我們的石油和天然氣更負(fù)責(zé)任
The licenses are to private businesses so the oil and gas produced will be sold on the world market, so the uk will have no say over who it is sold to. The energy secretary herself has admitted it won't bring down bills nor will it provide energy security
這些許可證是給私人企業(yè)的,所以生產(chǎn)的石油和天然氣將在世界市場上銷售,所以英國對賣給誰沒有發(fā)言權(quán)。能源大臣自己也承認(rèn),它不會降低賬單,也不會提供能源安全
Disgraceful. Far better to shut the whole thing down and just import from Qatar & America instead. Be much greener on the books, that’s all that matters
真無恥。最好把這一切都關(guān)閉,直接從卡塔爾和美國進(jìn)口。在明面上更環(huán)保,這才是最重要的
We will do that either way, this oil/gas won't be taken by the UK government, it's taken by private firms who then sell it on the world market
不管怎樣,我們都會這樣做,這些石油/天然氣不會被英國政府拿走,而是由私人公司拿走,然后在世界市場上出售
or switch to green energy like we're supposed to.
或者像我們應(yīng)該做的那樣轉(zhuǎn)向綠色能源。
Oil is useful for more than just energy generation bud..
石油的用途不僅僅是發(fā)電,小哥……
How many percent of production is that and what can not be replaced?
你說的其他用途占生產(chǎn)總量的百分之多少,哪些是不可替代的?
Most of it cannot be replaced as of yet and it's going to be a long time before it happens.. Transportation is one of the biggest one, cars, ships and planes still need oil.. Technology will catch up eventually
Plastic, no viable scalable alternative as of yet!
Energy production itself, efficiency of renewables need to improve a lot still..
到目前為止,大部分都無法被取代,而且要過很長時間才能被取代。交通運(yùn)輸是占比最大的一項(xiàng),汽車、輪船和飛機(jī)仍然需要石油……但科技最終會趕上來的
但塑料,目前還沒有可行的可擴(kuò)展替代品!
能源生產(chǎn)本身,可再生能源的效率還需要提高很多。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Source for that? Or can you atleast give some examples of things that cannot be replaced?
Some would say that cars boats and planes needs energy too. Or did you mean that cars are MADE from oil and not from steel?
Cars does not need oil, they run perfectly fine on electricity and biofuel and have done for 100+ years. There are electric planes too. We certainly dont NEED to fly every 6 month.
Plastic is obviously not necessary and hasnt been used for a very long time. Plastic can easily be replaced and can also be made from natural sources.
No, efficiency of renewables does not need to improve more for us to use them them, plenty of nations produce considerably more energy than UK exclusively from green sources. And of course, if we would have spent more on renewables and less on oil, they would already have been more effective.
你有來源嗎?或者你能不能至少舉出一些不能被取代的東西的例子?
有人會說汽車、船只和飛機(jī)也需要能源。還是你的意思是汽車是由石油而不是鋼鐵制造的?
汽車不需要石油,它們用電力和生物燃料運(yùn)行得很好,而且已經(jīng)運(yùn)行了100多年。也有電動飛機(jī)。我們當(dāng)然不需要每6個月坐一次飛機(jī)。
塑料顯然是不必要的,而且已經(jīng)很長時間沒有被使用了。塑料很容易被替換,也可以由自然資源制成。
不,我們不需要提高可再生能源的效率就可以使用它們,許多國家完全通過綠色能源生產(chǎn)的能源比英國多得多。當(dāng)然,如果我們在可再生能源上花更多的錢,在石油上花更少的錢,它們就會更有效。
"Cars does not need oil, they run perfectly fine on electricity and biofuel and have done for 100+ years. There are electric planes too. We certainly dont NEED to fly every 6 month"
What are you even talking about? The issue isn't replacement, the issue is substitution! Electric cars are still expensive and most people can't afford, over time, maybe they'll become cheaper than gas cars.. But that's not soon..
"Electric planes exist" you either have to be very naive of incredibly misinformed.. There's no commercial passenger electric plane, that invention is decades away
"Plastic is obviously not necessary and hasnt been used for a very long time. Plastic can easily be replaced and can also be made from natural sources"
Are you a child..? Everything you see or touch is made of plastic.. it's the most abundant man made substance in the world.. Plastic cannot be easily replaced, if that were true, it would have already happened..
“汽車不需要石油,它們用電力和生物燃料運(yùn)行得很好,而且已經(jīng)運(yùn)行了100多年。也有電動飛機(jī)。我們當(dāng)然不需要每6個月坐一次飛機(jī)”
你到底在說什么?問題不在于替換,而在于代替!電動汽車仍然很貴,大多數(shù)人負(fù)擔(dān)不起,隨著時間的推移,也許它們會比汽油車便宜…但這還不是很快…
“也有電動飛機(jī)”,你要么太天真,要么被誤導(dǎo)了。目前還沒有商用電動客機(jī),這項(xiàng)發(fā)明還需要幾十年的時間
“塑料顯然是不必要的,而且已經(jīng)很長時間沒有被使用了。塑料很容易被替換,也可以由自然資源制成”
你是小孩嗎?你看到或觸摸到的一切都是由塑料制成的。它是世界上最豐富的人造物質(zhì)。塑料是不容易被替換的,如果真是這樣,那早就這么干了。
And what would you prefer us to do, run civilisation on the energy of healing crystals? Perhaps if we install some turbines we could generate power from all the hot air people are blowing over a government energy security team managing to secure some energy.
I will say it's a shame we aren't putting more money into nuclear as a top priority for the grid, but after the lasting damage environmentalists did to it's image, I'm not surprised it's still less favourable to the climate people than things like wind power. There are some ongoing projects, at least, and thankfully we are investing in fusion research alongside most other developed nations, but either way we still need long-term planning of fossil fuel security for all forms of vehicles, plastic production, pharmaceuticals, and so on.
那你希望我們怎么做,依靠治愈水晶的能量來運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)文明嗎?也許如果我們安裝一些渦輪機(jī),我們就可以利用人們吹向政府能源安全小組的熱空氣來發(fā)電。
我想說的是,我們沒有把更多的錢投入到核能上(作為電網(wǎng)的首要任務(wù)),這是一種恥辱,但在環(huán)保主義者對核能的形象造成了持久的破壞之后,我并不感到驚訝,核能對氣候問題的影響仍然不如風(fēng)能等能源。至少有一些正在進(jìn)行的項(xiàng)目,值得慶幸的是,我們正在與大多數(shù)其他發(fā)達(dá)國家一起投資核聚變研究,但不管怎樣,我們?nèi)匀恍枰獙Ω鞣N形式的車輛、塑料生產(chǎn)、藥品等等的化石燃料安全進(jìn)行長期規(guī)劃。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
We will still need oil for chemical feedstocks post net zero, I really don’t see the conflict
在凈零排放后,我們?nèi)匀恍枰妥鳛榛瘜W(xué)原料,我真的不覺得這有什么沖突
This is good for UK energy security. If the UK government was genuinely worried they would plant more trees or replant the 80% of hedgerows that were destroyed in the last 50 years.
這有利于英國的能源安全。如果英國政府真的擔(dān)心,他們就應(yīng)該種更多的樹,或者重新種植在過去50年里被破壞的80%的樹籬。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
It's not good for UK energy security as the minister admitted, it will be owned by private firms who sell it on the global market. It is not "ours" the second it comes out of the ground
正如大臣所承認(rèn)的那樣,這對英國的能源安全不利,它將由私人公司擁有,并在全球市場上出售(所采油氣資源)。它一從地下冒出來就不是“我們的”了
It's gesture environmentalism to buy oil and gas from other countries but refuse to drill in the north sea. All big oil and gas companies like Equinor are investing in solar and wind projects, they interested in making money. Using profits from oil and gas to fund green project seems very sensible to me.
從其他國家購買石油和天然氣,卻拒絕在北海鉆探,這是環(huán)保主義作秀。所有像挪威國家石油公司這樣的大型石油和天然氣公司都在投資太陽能和風(fēng)能項(xiàng)目,它們對賺錢感興趣。用石油和天然氣的利潤來資助綠色項(xiàng)目在我看來是非常明智的。
Little known fact. Only British oil and gas creates emissions. That's why it's better to import it.
鮮為人知的事實(shí)。只有英國的石油和天然氣會產(chǎn)生排放。這就是為什么最好進(jìn)口它。(反諷)
It would be nice if we were getting the benefit of these oil license but it is sold in the open market. It does nothing to sure up our energy security.
如果我們能從這些石油許可證中獲益就好了,但它是在公開市場上出售的。這對確保我們的能源安全毫無幫助。
More oil and gas production means price comes down.
更多的石油和天然氣產(chǎn)量就意味著價(jià)格下降啊。
Never will understand this problem. Us not extracting oil or other resources will have no effect on global consumption.
我永遠(yuǎn)不會理解這個問題。我們不開采石油或其他資源并不會對全球消費(fèi)總量產(chǎn)生影響。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
I just wish we'd stop pretending to give a fuck about the environment cause no matter what the choice of money versus the right thing...money always wins.
我只是希望我們不要再假裝tmd關(guān)心環(huán)境了,因?yàn)闊o論金錢 VS 正確的事情之間的選擇是什么……金錢總是贏家。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
would be interesting to see where is going to flood when the water levels rise lol.
當(dāng)海平面上升時,看看哪里會被洪水淹沒會很有趣,呵呵。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處