目录

  • 1 Unit 1: Critical reading skill: Identifying the argument
    • 1.1 Distinguishing between fact and opinion
      • 1.1.1 course briefing
      • 1.1.2 course introduction
      • 1.1.3 facts and opinions
      • 1.1.4 Review 1
    • 1.2 Identifying the structure of an argument
    • 1.3 Distinguishing between argument and non-argument
    • 1.4 Identifying position and conclusion
    • 1.5 Recognizing the key information
    • 1.6 Review 2
  • 2 Unit 2 Critical reading skills: Developing the argument
    • 2.1 Developing an argument
    • 2.2 Keeping internal consistency
    • 2.3 Keeping logical consistency
    • 2.4 Refuting alternative arguments
    • 2.5 Review 3 (for skill 5 & 6)
    • 2.6 Review 4 (for skill 7 to 9)
  • 3 Unit 3: Critical reading skills: Evaluating the argument
    • 3.1 Comparing independent reasons with joint reasons
    • 3.2 Comparing summative conclusion with logical conclusion
    • 3.3 Detecting flaws in an argument
      • 3.3.1 Skill 12(1)
      • 3.3.2 skill 12 (2)
    • 3.4 Skill 13 Adopting effective language
    • 3.5 Review 5
    • 3.6 Review 6 (for skill 12)
  • 4 Unit 4: Critical reading and writing practice (I)
    • 4.1 critical reading evaluation
    • 4.2 text 1
    • 4.3 text 2
    • 4.4 text 3
    • 4.5 text 4
    • 4.6 comments on the mid-term exam
    • 4.7 comments on writing 2
  • 5 Unit 5:Critical reading and writing practice(II)
    • 5.1 text 5
    • 5.2 text 6
    • 5.3 text 9
text 4

Text 4:  Global Warming Requires a Global Solution (2)

 

1    The increase in greenhouse gas emissionsover the past 50 years is viewed as a major factor in global warming. Researchby the leading world authorities on global warming, the intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change (IPCC), suggests that even if all carbon dioxide emissionsceased today, there would be climate changes for a number of years to come,leading to water shortages for 5 billion people and increased flooding acrossNorthern Europe by 2025. However, scientists have proposed a range of solutionsfrom increasing efficient use of fossil fuels to incentives for using cleanerforms of energy, which they believe, if applied globally, would be sufficientto make a real impact on climate change.

 

2    The Kyoto Protocol was proposed in 1997 as ameans of working towards a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and thehalting of long-term climate change. It focuses on developed countries, theworld’s greatest polluters, and seeks to establish an overall reduction ingreenhouse gas emissions of 5 percent on 1990 levels over the period of2008-2012. Many key developed industrial nations have ratified the Protocol buta number of others have been resistant. Some governments argue that it is notin their countries’ interests to form part of a global agreement. However, Ishall argue that, although it may need to be applied differentially, a globalsolution is, ultimately, essential and that developed countries need to takethe lead.

 

3    Politicians, scientists and businesses indeveloped countries have given a number of reasons for not signing up to theProtocol. These include doubt about the real link between carbon dioxideemissions and global warming, concerns about the effect on their own economiesand a rejection of the need for imposed, rather than voluntary, reductions inemissions. A number of leaders of state have cited the lack of emissionreduction targets for developing countries as the key reason behind theirrejection of the Protocol. On the surface, this appears a fair argument –global warming is problem for everyone, not just those in developed countries,and requires every nation to participate. William K. Stevens (1997) makes thepoint that, if left unchecked, emissions from developing countries will surpassthose from developed countries in 20-30 years.

 

4    Emissions from developing countries areclearly an important issue. However, for developing countries, the argumentthat they should be subject to exactly the same restrictions as developedcountries does not carry weight. After watching developed countries build theirwealth and power on extensive use of fossil fuels this appears to be a case of“do what I say, not what I do”. Dr Mwandoysa, chair of the developingcountries’ caucus on climate change, makes the point that many developingcountries are struggling just to provide an acceptable standard of living fortheir citizens but are being asked to support changes which would allow thedeveloped world to maintain its wasteful lifestyle (Stevens, 1997). This issimilar to someone dumping their waste in a local field and then complainingthat other people are not doing enough to preserve the countryside.

 

5    Also, even though developing countries arenot required to reduce emissions under the Protocol, Dr Mwandoysa notes thatmost of them are already working towards this aim, even with limited resourcesand technology. Developing countries recognize that they have a role to play inhalting global warming, but feel that developed countries are better placed todevelop the structures and technologies which are needed to support this workfurther. This is equitable, given developed countries’ greater role in thedevelopment of global warming.

 

6    Greenpeace (2001) suggests that reluctanceto offend powerful fossil fuel companies is the key reason behind somedeveloped countries’ reluctance to address global warming. Countries which havea heavy reliance on fossil fuels face the possibility that agreeing to reduceemissions will have serious implications for their economy in terms of joblosses. However, Stevens (1997) suggests that developed countries, such as theUSA and Australia, are actually more fearful of competitive advantages beinggiven to those developing nations such as China and South Korea who stand onthe threshold of industrialization. Whilst such arguments do have validity interms of developed countries seeking to maintain their current economic power,their validity is short-term.

 

7    In the short term, countries who refuse toreduce greenhouse gas emissions are able to continue as economic superpowers.However, ultimately a failure to address greenhouse gas emissions could enforcechanges above and beyond those imposed by the Kyoto Protocol. Long-term globalwarming is anticipated to cause significant climate changes in those developedcountries that are reluctant to sign the Protocol. These changes will impact ona range of major industries, for example, causing flooding in tourism centersand droughts in key agricultural lands (Penfold, 2001). The extreme economicconsequences of such changes undermine the validity of economic preservation asan argument for not ratifying the Kyoto Protocol.

 

8    Therefore, although there are economicconsequences in taking action to reduce emissions, they are ultimatelyoutweighed by the consequences of unwelcome climate change and long-termeconomic disaster if we fail to implement global action. Not all countries haveplayed an equal part in the causation of global warming and it is fair thatthose who have contributed most towards global warming should also contributemost towards finding its solutions. However, given the potential consequencesof global warming, it does require a global solution and there is a role andrationale for all countries in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

 

 

Activity1: Complete or translate the following expressions based on the informationgiven in the text.

Consequences of global warming:

fl_________     water _________     dr ________

________ sea level

 

Activity 2: Fill in theblanks with appropriate verbs or verb phrases.

________ a solution 提出      ________ the lead 领衔     

__________ one’s wealth累积  

________ the thresholdof industrialization 即将进入…..之列

Consequences of climatechanges ________ economic consequences 超过

 

Activity3: Isolate the key information from the text, then illustrate the line ofreasoning of the argument with a graphic organizer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Active4: Evaluate the argument with the help of the evaluation sheet.

Reading Evaluation Sheet

 

                                                                                                       

 

Aspect

 
 

Detail

 
 

Relevant Question

 
 

Evaluation

 
 

Title of the article

 



 

Position

 

 

Is it clearly presented?

 

 

Conclusion

 

 

Is it clearly presented?

 

Is it summative or logical?

 

 

Proposition 1

 

 

Is it relevant, representative,

 

and sufficient?

 

 

Proposition 2

 

 

Is it relevant, representative,

 

and sufficient?

 

 

Proposition 3

 

 

Is it relevant, representative,

 

and sufficient?

 

 

...

 



 

Line of reasoning

 

 

Is it easy to follow?

 

 

Is it logically organized?

 

 

Is it biased or unbalanced?

 

 

Alternative arguments

 

 

Are they considered?

 

 

Strengths

 

 

What impresses you most?

 

Is solid evidence provided?

 

...

 

 

Weaknesses

 

 

Are there internal inconsistency or  flaws, or other weaknesses in this argument?