全屏显示专题章节

Feuding and on the defensive，America's greens are in a political rut.And it's not all George Bush's fault.

Howard and Kate，Los Angeles lawyers，hand round the wine and sandwiches；the neighbours leaf through the pamphlets；the guest speaker goes smartly from one flip chart to another.WelCome to a weekend fundraiser for Friends of the River，set up more than 30 years ago in an abortive effort to stop a dam across California's Stanislaus river.

WelCome，too，to the diverse world of American environmentalism.Friends of the River，with 6，000 members now dedicated to protecting all California's rivers，is just one group among thousands，from the nationwide Sierra Club to Pennsylvania's Allegheny Land Trust，that seeks to minimize man's impact on nature.

America's environmentalist movement has undeniable potential clout and a huge reservoir of public sympathy.A Yale University survey reckons that three-fifths of voters consider the nation's environment to be“only fair”or“poor，”and two-thirds believe the federal government should do more to protect it.Most Americans believe that global warming was partly to blame for Hurricane Katrina and that“continuing environmental improvements must be made regardless of cost.”

However，the movement finds it hard to turn this into political success.Under George Bush，it has been stuck in grumpy opposition.And it has conspicuously failed to make any of the Bush administration's alleged sins—its weakening of environmental standards，its determination to allow oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge，its scorning of the Kyoto Protocol—count against the president or his party at the ballot box.Across the movement there is a feeling of trying to hold a fast-breaking line.

Arguably，that feeling is overdone.Many of Mr Bush's most fiendish plans remain trapped in Washington's legislative labyrinth:they include drilling in Alaska and the“Clear Skies”initiative(which would weaken measures to control industrial air pollution).

But there is no guarantee they will stay trapped.Holding the line on Alaskan drilling depends on Senate filibustering—a procedural defence that makes many Democratic senators nervous，especially when their constituents complain of high petrol prices.Meanwhile，other allegedly unverdant bills are making progress.The House has already passed one sponsored by Richard Pombo，a California congressman who flaunts a rancher's Stetson，that would weaken the Endangered Species Act by requiring the government to compensate landowners for limits on land use.

It is not just a matter of legislative retreat.Greens are losing ground in two ways.First，they are often seen as too leftwing.A poll conducted two years ago for the conservative Centre for the Defence of Free Enterprise found that 61％of voters reckoned“environmental groups usually push for solutions that are too extreme.”Second，their message is fragmented.As twoofthemovement's iconoclasts，Michael Schellenberger and Ted Nordhaus，argued in a now notorious 2004 paper called“The Death of Environmentalism，”the movement is split between special interests and has no overall vision.

So what has gone wrong?One possibility is that environmentalists have been misled by their past success.Although the Sierra Club can trace its history back to 1892，modern enviornmentalism is mostly a product of the Woodstock generation—of“silent Spring，”a 1962 book that exposed the effects of pesticides，of the Whole Earth Catalogues，which were launched in 1968，and of Earth Day，which was first celebrated(by some 20m Americans)on April 22nd 1970.This activism led to startling advances:the National Environmental Policy Act(1969)，the Clean Air Act(1970)，the Clean Water Act(1972)，the Endangered Species Act(1973)and so on.

Yet the very success of these laws has created two problems for the movement.The first has to do with the relevance of the message.For instance，if you look at endangered species，the grizzly bear population has recovered so well that some want them taken off the endangered list； there are now 27m white-tailed deer and 4.2m wild turkeys，both species once thought close to extinction.Similarly，the air in Los Angeles is hardly healthy but the smog is much better than it was in the 1970s.

The other legacy of all that law-making in the 1970s is organizational.It shifted the environmental movement's focus from protest(trying to change the law)to advocacy(trying to apply it).The Sierra Club，which now has 750，000 members(compared with 114，000 in 1870)，can still mobilize individual Americans.“You try to put a highway through the Great Salt Lake，”says one official，“and our members will be there!”But much of the club's effort now goes into lobbying and education.

The pioneer of advocacy is the 35-year-old Natural Resources Defense Council.It has doubled in size in the past five years and now boasts 1.2m activists，though only 720，000 are dues-paying members.Its strength is its permanent staff of 276 scientists，policy wonks and lawyers.They have played a decisive role in dozens of environmental victories，from the phasing out of lead in petrol in the 1970s to stopping the navy in 2003 from using a sonar system that would have deafened or even killed whales.

Grassroots activists and“grasstops”advocacy are not mutually exclusive.Some 440 groups，including the Sierra Club and the NRDC，form the Endangered Species Coalition(set up to see off Mr Pombo).But there are also deep divisions everywhere you look.Some greens see nuclear energy as an answer to global warming and fossil-fuel dependence；most oppose it as the most dangerous fuel of all.Some think“clean coal”technology is a potential breakthrough，but West Virginia's Friends of the Mountains has“reservations about a technology that sweeps Co₂under the rug for four descendants to deal with.”There are also rows within organizations—such as the battle within the Sierra Club about whether to oppose immigration on the grounds that greater numbers hurt the environment.

Even consensus on principle—such as over the need to promote alternative energy—often breaks down in practice.For instance，to its supporters，a proposal to build 130 giant windmills off Cape Cod will help battle global warming.Robert Kennedy at the NRDC disagrees；the wind farm will be bad for local fishermen，migratory birds and the horizon，and will be“financially feasible only because the federal and state governments have promised$241m in subsidies.”But then other greens claim his motives are not so pure.They say that Mr Kennedy，like his uncle Ted，is interested only in protecting the view from the family compound at Hyannis Port.And so the row blows on，green against green.

Mr Kennedy sees the diversity of the environmental movement“as an emblem of its health”.He compares it to the civil-rights movement，where Malcolm X and Martin Luther King“seldom coordinated efforts as they marched towards a common goal.”Messrs Schellenberger and Nordhaus view the diversity as fatal incoherence，hence their call for environmentalists to unite around the Apollo Alliance，founded three years ago to give the green movement its equivalent of President Kennedy's pledge to send man to the moon.

The problem is the alliance's similarity to motherhood and apple pie.Apollo's mission involves investing in technology to create an economy that runs on clean and sustainable energy，creates millions of jobs and demonstrates that a“just，environmentally balanced and economically prosperous future is attainable.”Those signing on to this deeply uncontroversial vision are mainly liberal groups(the mine-workers' union，Greenpeace，the Ford Foundation and Ben＆Jerry's).But it is hard to imagine Mr Bush，the dreaded Mr Pombo or even the head of Exxon-Mobil disagreeing with such aims.

That points to the biggest practical political question:whether greens should fight the republicans tooth and nail or look for common ground.The tendency is to see the Bush administration as the devil incarnate.Gale Norton，the interior secretary，used to be a lobbyist for a company that produces titanium dioxide pigments and she once defended some industries'“righttopollute.”StephenJohnson，bossofthe Environmental Protection Agency，formerly worked in the chemical industry.The Department of Energy has several officials who entered government from the industries that they now regulate.And don't even get the greens started on Dick Cheney's energy task-force.

But are the Republicans really so bad?In last month's state-of-the-union address，amid all the familiar sops to the energy industry，Mr Bush pledged to pump billions of dollars into alternative energy to wean American off its addiction to oil.Many of the country's most verdant laws have been signed into law by Republican presidents，from Theodore Roosevelt，who created America's magnificent system of national forests，to Mr Bush's father，whose Clean Air Act of 1990 pioneered emissions trading as a way to reduce sulphur dioxide pollution.That“cap and trade”idea has now been embraced by Republican governors at the state level.

There are also signs of compromise from two important parts of the conservative coalition—Christians and Big Business.“The environment is a values issue，”says the Reverend Ted Haggard，president of the 30m-strong National Association of Evangelicals，which in 2004 sent a message to its 50，000 churches affirming that“God-given dominion is a sacred responsibility to steward the earth and not a licence to abuse the creation of which we are a part.”Meanwhile，many big companies，such as General Electric，now actively support greenery—not least because they think they can make money out of it.

Could today's republicans therefore take on the greenish hue of their predecessors?Perhaps not immediately.Only 22 House republicans and six Republican senators voted against last year's unverdant energy bill.But there is still hope.One of the rebels was John McCain，a supporter of carbon caps and an opponent of drilling in Alaska.Imagine a presidential contest in 2008 between the Arizona senator and Hillary Clinton—and perhaps America's greens will no longer need to feel quite so paranoid.

1.The author mentions in the lead that“America's green's are in a political rut.And it's not all George Bush's fault.”So whose fault is it according to the author?

2.What kind of role does the Bush administration play in the America's modern environmentalist movement?

3.What political success has the America's environmental movement achieved?

4.What political failures has the America's environmental movement suffered?

5.What are the prospects of the movement according to the author?

Flip chart:A chart consisting of sheets hinged at the top that can be flipped over to present information sequentially.

The Whole Earth Catalogues:“The Whole Earth catalogues”is an environmentalist magazine founded by Stewart Brand，author of the bestseller publication in 1968“The World Earth Catalogues.”

Natural Resources Defense Council:Natural Resources Defense Council，a national，non-profit organization of scientists，lawyers and environmental specialists dedicated to protecting public health and the environment.Founded in 1970，NRDC has more than 550，000 members nationwide.

Richard Pombo:Californian Republican Richard Pombo，proposed legislation to sell roughly a quarter of the land managed by the National Park Service.The legislation was later described by his chief of staff as a“bureaucratic exercise”designed to evaluate the costs of not drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge(ANWR).

In September 2005，Pombo helped rewrite the 1973 Endangered Species Act.The proposed revision“was widely denounced by environmentalists as a disturbing retreat from habitat protection and a paperwork nightmare for agencies seeking to revive the 1，268 threatened and endangered plants and animals in the country，186 of which are in California.”

By March 2006，Environmental Science＆Technology reported that Pombo was coordinating efforts with Pac/West Communications to weaken the Endangered Species Act(ESA).Pac/West has created the Save Our Species Alliance，an anti-environmental front group that is campaigning for Pombo's bill to change the ESA.

Pombo has pushed for oil drilling in ANWR，despite concerns about the fragile ecosystem and opposition from moderate Republicans.

Robert F.Kennedy Jr.:Robert F.Kennedy Jr.，Nephew of President John F.Kennedy and son of Senator Robert F.Kennedy，earns his reputation as A Resolute Defender of the Environment by a litany of successful legal actions.Mr Kennedy serves as Senior Attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council，Chief Prosecuting Attorney for the Hudson Riverkeeper and President of Waterkeeper Alliance.He is also a Clinical Professor and Supervising Attorney at Pace University School of Law's Environmental Litigation Clinic and is co-host of Ring of Fire on Air America Radio.He has worked on several political campaigns including the presidential campaigns of Edward M.Kennedy in 1980，Al Gore in 2000 and John Kerry in 2004.

Sierra Club:U.S.organizationfortheconservationofnatural resources，headquartered in San Francisco.It was founded in 1892 by a group of Californians，including John Muir，who wanted to sponsor wilderness outings in Pacific Coast mountain regions.As its first president，Muir initiated the club's involvement in political action on behalf of nature conservation.With branches in all 50 states，it works to educate the public on environmental issues and lobbies local，state，and federal agencies for environmental legislation.

Sweep/brush sth under the carpet/rug:掩盖丑事。This idiom alludes to sweeping dust under the rug，so it won't be seen.

Civil Right Movement:美国民权运动　Movement for racial equality in the U.S.that，through nonviolent protest，broke the pattern of racial segregation in the South and achieved equal rights legislation for blacks.Following the U.S.Supreme Court decision in Brown v.Board of Education of Topeka(1954)，African American and white supporters attempted to end entrenched segregationist practices.When Rosa Parks was arrested in 1955 in Montgomery，Ala.，an African American boycott of the bus system was led by Martin Luther King，Jr.，and Ralph Abernathy.In the early 1960s the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee led boycotts and sit-ins to desegregate many public facilities.Using the nonviolent methods of Mohandas K.Gandhi，the movement spread，forcing the desegregation of department stores，supermarkets，libraries，and movie theatres.The Deep South remained adamant in its opposition to most desegregation measures，often violently；protesters were attacked and occasionally killed.Their efforts culminated in a march on Washington，D.C.，in 1963 to support civil rights legislation.Following the assassination of John F.Kennedy，President.Lyndon B.Johnson persuaded Congress to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964，a victory that was followed by the Voting Rights Act in 1965.After 1965，militant groups such as the Black Panther Party split off from the civil rights movement，and riots in black ghettos and King's assassination caused many supporters to withdraw.In the succeeding decades，leaders sought power through elective office and substantive economic and educational gains through affirmative action.

Task force:A temporary grouping of military units or forces under one commander for the performance of a specific operation or assignment.A temporary grouping of individuals and resources for the accomplishment of a specific objective.

Kyoto Protocol:京都议定书　An international agreement that aims to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and the presence of greenhouse gases.Countries that ratify the Kyoto Protocol are assigned maximum carbon emission levels and can participate in carbon credit trading.Emitting more than the assigned limit will cause the violating country to be penalized by lowering its emission limitation in the following period.

The Kyoto Protocol separates countries into two groups.Annex I includes developed nations，while Non-Annex I refers to developing countries.Emission limitations are only placed on Annex I countries.Non-Annex I nations participate by investing in projects that lower emissions in their own countries.For these projects，they earn carbon credits.These credits can be traded or sold to Annex I countries，which allow them a higher level of maximum carbon emissions for that period.为了人类免受气候变暖的威胁，1997年12月，在日本京都召开的《联合国气候变化框架公约》缔约方第三次会议通过了旨在限制发达国家温室气体排放量以抑制全球变暖的《京都议定书》。《京都议定书》规定，到2010年，所有发达国家二氧化碳等6种温室气体的排放量，要比1990年减少5.2％。中国于1998年5月签署并于2002年8月核准了该议定书。2005年2月16日，《京都议定书》正式生效。这是人类历史上首次以法规的形式限制温室气体排放。为了促进各国完成温室气体减排目标，议定书允许采取以下四种减排方式:

1.两个发达国家之间可以进行排放额度买卖的“排放权交易”，即难以完成削减任务的国家，可以花钱从超额完成任务的国家买进超出的额度。

2.以“净排放量”计算温室气体排放量，即从本国实际排放量中扣除森林所吸收的二氧化碳的数量。

3.可以采用绿色开发机制，促使发达国家和发展中国家共同减排温室气体。

4.可以采用“集团方式”，即欧盟内部的许多国家可视为一个整体，采取有的国家削减、有的国家增加的方法，在总体上完成减排任务。

Carbon footprint:A carbon footprint is the total set of GHG(greenhouse gas)emissions caused directly and indirectly by an individual，organization，event or product.An individual，nation，or organization's carbon footprintismeasuredbyundertakingaGHGemissions assessment.Once the size of a carbon footprint is known，a strategy can be devised to reduce it.Carbon offsets，or the mitigation of carbon emissions through the development of alternative projects such as solar or wind energy or reforestation，represent one way of managing a carbon footprint.The concept and name of the carbon footprint originates from the ecological footprint discussion.The carbon footprint is a subset of the ecological footprint.

“New Environmentalism”:In the 1950s and 1960s，the public was becoming aware that conservation of wilderness and wildlife was but one aspect of protecting an endangered environment.Concern about air pollution，water pollution，solid waste disposal，dwindling energy resources，radiation，pesticide poisoning(particularly as described in Rachel Carson's influential Silent Spring，1962)，noise pollution，and other environmentalproblemsengagedabroadeningnumberof sympathizers and gave rise to what beCome known as the“new environmentalism.”Public support for these issues culminated in the Earth Day demonstrations of 1970.

The new movement had a broader goal—to preserve life on the planet.The more radical groups believe that continued industrial development is incompatible with environmentalism.Other groups，notably Greenpeace，which advocated direct action to preserve endangered species，often clashed violently with opponents.Less militant organizations called for sustainable development and the need to balance environmentalism with economic development.

Alaska Oil Drilling:Though the months of exorbitant heating bills have melted away with the snow，there are still signs of energy problems.Frequent blackouts in California and skyrocketing gasoline prices point to an impending energy crisis.

In order to alleviate this emergency，President George W.Bush is advocating an increase in energy supply，rather than a decrease in demand.While it may be too late to stop gas prices from rising for the summer travel season，Bush is advocating tapping the oil supply at the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Northeast Alaska.Not surprisingly this is causing some backlash with environmental activists and the few inhabitants of the snow tundra.They argue that the available oil supply in the ANWR is not sufficient enough to justify the potential environmental damage.

“Clear Skies”initiative:The President's Clear Skies legislation would create a mandatory program that would dramatically reduce power plant emissions of sulfur dioxide(So₂)，nitrogen oxides(No₂)，and mercury by setting a national cap on each pollutant.

The President's Clear Skies bill was proposed in response to a growing need for an emission reduction plan that will protect human health and the environment while providing regulatory certainty to the industry.

The emissions reductions from Clear Skies would help to alleviate our nation's major air pollution—related health and environmental problems including fine particles，ozone，mercury，acid rain，nitrogen deposition，and visibility impairment.Clear Skies would:

●Cut sulfur dioxide(So₂)emissions by 73 percent，from year 2000 emissions of 11 million tons to a cap of 4.5 million tons in 2010 and to a cap of 3 million tons in 2018.

●Cut emissions of nitrogen oxides(No₂)by 67 percent，from year 2000 emissions of 5 million tons to a cap of 2.1 million tons in 2008 and to a cap of 1.7 million tons in 2018.

●Cut mercury emissions by 69 percent—the first-ever national cap on mercury emissions.Emissions would be cut from 1999 emissions of 48 tons to a cap of 26 tons in 2010 and to a cap of 15 tons in 2018.

The Woodstock generation:The visible signs of the counterculture permeated American society in the late 1960s and early 1970s.Hair grew longer and beards beCome common.Blue jeans and tee shirts took the place of slacks，jackets and ties.The use of illegal drugs increased in an effort to free the mind from past constraints.Rock and roll grew，proliferated and transformed into many musical variations.The Beatles，the Rolling Stones and other British groups took the country by storm.“Hard Rock”grew popular，and songs with a political or social commentary，such as those by singer-songwriter Bob Dylan，beCome common.The youth counterculture reached its apogee in August 1969 at Woodstock，a three-day music festival in rural New York State attended by almost half-a-million persons.The festival，mythologized in films and record albums，gave its name to the era—The Woodstock Generation.

The energy that fueled the civil rights movement and catalyzed the counterculture also stimulated an environmental movement in the mid-1960s.Many were aroused by the publication in 1962 of Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring，which pointed to the ravages of chemical pesticides，particularly DDT.Public concern about the environment continued to increase throughout the 1960s as many beCome aware of other pollutants surrounding them—automobile emissions，industrial wastes，oil spills—that threatened their health and the beauty of their surroundings.

Cap and trade:“Cap and trade”or“allowance trading”is a policy approach，used by EPA's Clean Air Market Programs，to controll large amounts of emissions from a group of sources at costs that are lower than if sources were regulated individually.The approach first sets an overall cap，or maximum amount of emissions per compliance period，that will achieve the desired environmental effects.Authorizations to emit in the form of emission allowances are then allocated to affected sources，and the total number of allowances cannot exceed the cap.It has the following key features:

●An emissions“cap”:a limit on the total amount of pollution that can be emitted(released)from all regulated sources(e.g.，power plants)；the cap is set lower than historical emissions to cause reductions in emissions.

●Allowances:an allowance is an authorization to emit a fixed amount of a pollutant.

●Measurement:accurate tracking of all emissions.

●Flexibility:sources can choose how to reduce emissions，including whether to buy additional allowances from other sources that reduce emissions.

●Allowance trading:sources can buy or sell allowances on the open market.

●Compliance:at the end of each compliance period，each source must own at least as many allowances as its emissions.

●For example，in the Acid Rain Program，sulfur dioxide(So₂) emissions were 17.5 million tons in 1980 from electric utilities in the U.S.Beginning in 1995，annual caps were set that decline to a level of 8.95 million allowances by the year 2010(one allowance permits a source to emit one ton of So₂).At the end of each year，EPA reduces the allowances held by each source by the amount of that source's emissions.

Endangered Species Act:The Endangered Species Act of 1973 or ESA was the most wide-ranging of dozens of United States environmental laws passed in the 1970s in an attempt to halt or reverse the degradation of the environment.The Act is designed to protect critically imperiled species from extinction due to“the consequences of economic growth and development untempered by adequate concern and conservation.The Act was passed in the wake of a 1973 conference in Washington D.C.that led to the signing of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora(CITES)，which restricted international commerce in plant and animal species believed to be actually or potentially harmed by trade.The Act contains a citizen suit clause，which allows citizens to sue the government to enforce the law.

Apollo Alliance:The Apollo Alliance is a project organized by the Institute for America's Future and the Center on Wisconsin Strategy.Its goals include establishing energy independence for the United States of America，as well as developing cleaner and more efficient energy alternatives.Its allies are drawn from businesses，over 30 labor unions，and environmental organizations.As it claims，the program for sustainable energy independence would create three million good jobs，free the nation from imported oil，and promote a healthier environment.States and cities are leading the way toward a clean energy future.

Cheney Energy Task Force after Vice-president of the United States of America and former CEO of Halliburton，Dick Cheney.

In his second week in office George W.Bush created the task force，officially known as the National Energy Policy Development Group(NEPDG)with Dick Cheney as chairman.This group was supposed to develop an energy policy for the Bush administration.With both Bush and Cheney coming from the energy industry，which had contributed heavily to their campaign，and with the group proceeding in extreme secrecy，critics charged that the energy industry was exercising undue influence over national policy.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/bronwen_maddox/article4647249.ece

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/31/AR2009053102077.html

报刊英语中的造词:前面已提及John-Bolton-like以及“narrowcast”。本篇文章再次读到“grasstops”一词，读者稍稍注意便能看出这是源于grassroots造出来的，因为前面说“Grassroots activists”，而接着此处的grasstops advocacy很可能是想表述基层的活动人士与上层的支持。再如在一定的语境可能出现“histories”与“herstories”。我们能看出后面造的词源于history一词的复数，而词中含his，造词者便将his换成女性的her，从而成了并不存在的herstories。

Ⅰ.According to the article，determine which statements are true and which are false.

1.The author believes that the America's environmentalist movement has failed to turn public sympathy into political success，a good example for which is drilling in Alaska.

2.The Alaska drilling bill makes many Democratic senators nervous because of high petrol prices.

3.The government has to compensate landowners for limits on land use imposed by the Endangered Species Act.

4.The environmentalists are giving ground to special interests of environmentalist groups.

5.Modern environmentalism can trace its history back to 1892.

1.“The alliance's similarity to motherhood and apple pie”probably________.

A.means that the Apollo Alliance is largely composed of women

B.means that the Alliance is too bland in its position or has got merely innocuous ideals

C.means that the Alliance is similar to apple pie in its organization chart

2.In the author's opinion，the problems caused by the legislative success of modern environmentalism include t he following except________.

A.the irrelevance of the message

B.the deep divisions among and even within green organizations

C.the consensus on principle

D.the breaking down of consensus in practice

3.The opinions on the following issues illustrate the divisions within the environmentalist groups except________.