友友英语网 首页 CATTI资料 查看内容

2018年5月CATTI一级、二级、三级笔译实务真题来源小汇

2018-5-20 19:00| 发布者: admin| 查看: 1819| 评论: 0

摘要: ​一级笔译汉译英文章来源:​中国商用飞机有限责任公司( 简称“中国商飞公司”) 是经国务院批准成立,由国务院国有资产监督管理委员会、上海国盛( 集团) 有限公司、中国航空工业集团公司、中国铝业公司、 ...

​一级笔译汉译英文章来源:

​中国商用飞机有限责任公司( 简称“中国商飞公司”) 是经国务院批准成立,由国务院国有资产监督管理委员会、上海国盛( 集团) 有限公司、中国航空工业集团公司、中国铝业公司、宝钢集团有限公司、中国中化股份有限公司共同出资组建,由国家控股的有限责任公司。公司于2008年5月11日在上海揭牌成立,总部设在上海。公司董事长、党委书记:金壮龙,总经理:贺东风。

  中国商飞公司是实施国家大型飞机重大专项中大型客机项目的主体,也是统筹干线飞机和支线飞机发展、实现我国民用飞机产业化的主要载体,主要从事民用飞机及相关产品的科研、生产、试验试飞,从事民用飞机销售及服务、租赁和运营等相关业务。中国商飞公司下辖中国商飞北京研究中心(北京民用飞机技术研究中心)、中国商飞设计研发中心(上海飞机设计研究院)、中国商飞总装制造中心(上海飞机制造有限公司)、中国商飞民用飞机试飞中心、中国商飞客户服务中心(上海飞机客户服务有限公司)、中国商飞基础能力中心(上海航空工业(集团)有限公司)、中国商飞新闻中心(上海《大飞机》杂志有限公司)、中国商飞四川分公司(筹)、中国商飞美国公司等成员单位,在北京、美国洛杉矶、法国巴黎设有北京办事处、美国办事处、欧洲办事处等办事机构,在上海设立金融服务中心。中国商飞公司参股成都航空有限公司和浦银金融租赁股份有限公司。

  中国商飞公司按照现代企业制度组建和运营,实行“主制造商-供应商”发展模式,重点加强飞机研发设计、总装制造、市场营销、客户服务、适航取证和供应商管理等能力,坚持中国特色,体现技术进步,走市场化、集成化、产业化、国际化的发展道路,将全力打造更加安全、经济、舒适、环保的大型客机,立志让中国人自主研制的大型客机早日飞上蓝天。

  公司使命:让中国的大飞机翱翔蓝天。

  大型客机是一个国家工业、科技水平的综合实力的集中体现,被誉为“现代工业之花”和“现代制造业的一颗明珠”。中国商飞公司因民族的百年飞天梦想和国家的战略而立,肩负着国家的意志,承载着民族的梦想和人民的重托。让中国的大飞机翱翔蓝天的神圣使命,召唤和激励着中国商飞公司全体员工将人生追求和价值目标融入到为大型客机事业的不懈奋斗中,攻坚克难、奋勇前行,坚定地走具有中国特色、体现技术进步的民机发展道路,实现大型客机项目的研制成功和商业成功,带动我国经济和科技发展,使中国航空工业向更高领域迈进。

  公司愿景:为客户提供更加安全、经济、舒适和环保的民用飞机。

  现代大型客机开创了人类飞翔的文明,是最具效率的交通出行工具。中国商飞公司作为世界民机大家庭的成员,将与客户、合作伙伴携手合作,致力于为客户提供更加安全、经济、舒适、环保的民用飞机,使更多的人享受航空科技成果,使人类进入一个安全性水平更高、飞行风险更低的新时代,一个“人与蓝天和谐相处”的新时代,架起人类友谊、文明、进步的桥梁,促进全球可持续发展。

  公司目标:把大型客机项目建设成为新时期改革开放的标志性工程和建设创新型国家的标志性工程,把中国商飞公司建设成为国际一流航空企业(“两个建成”)。

  研制和发展大型客机是建设创新型国家,提高我国自主创新能力和增强国家核心竞争力的重大战略举措。中国商飞公司坚定地走具有中国特色、体现技术进步的自主创新之路,实施体制机制创新、技术创新、管理创新,坚持市场化、集成化、产业化、国际化发展方略,发展具有自主知识产权的干线飞机和支线飞机,实现项目的研制成功、商业成功,提高我国航空工业的制造能力和管理水平,带动我国相应基础学科取得重大进展,推动我国相关领域关键技术取得群体突破,促进我国民机产业链和产业集群的形成,发挥对创新型国家建设的全面带动作用和典型示范效应,使中国商飞公司成为国际一流民用飞机制造企业。

一级笔译英译汉文章来源:

In December 2015, British publishing stood accused of woeful blindness to diversity, and not for the first time, after World Book Night (WBN) announced its titles, and none of the 15 books was by a writer of colour. An apology was issued by organisers but a wider malaise had already set in, and along with it, the troubling feeling that WBN’s oversight was less an isolated incident and more a recurring pattern of exclusion that stretched across the literary establishment.​

A report on the state of the books industry had been published earlier that year by the development agency Spread the Word, which drew attention to how intransigently white, middle-class (and further up the ladder, male) it remained, from literary festivals and prizes to publications and personnel. Then, last autumn, there was more embarrassing exposure when World Book Day – which focuses on children’s titles – issued its own all-white book list and an independent publisher, OWN IT! flagged up the fact that only one black, British male debut novelist had been published in 2016 (which they published). Earlier this year, there was talk of a boycott when theCarnegie medal for children’s literature revealed its all-white longlist.​

The industry has been announcing strategies for change since 2015. Publishing houses have rolled out paid internships, mentoring schemes and traineeships to attract socially under-represented and BAME applicants on an unprecedented scale, as well as creating opportunities for women to move into boardrooms.

To name a few recent initiatives: Penguin Random House is offering interest-free rent loans (to draw more applicants from outside London), and has set a company goal “for all new hires and the books we acquire to reflect UK society by 2025 in terms of social mobility, ethnicity, gender, disability, and sexuality”. Faber’s schemes include scholarships on its novel-writing course; HarperCollins is launching programmes for BAME employees and those taking long-term parental leave, while Hachette is encouraging diversity at an executive level (in a mentoring scheme with board members) and working with the Stephen Lawrence Trust in speaking to students in inner-city schools.

​The industry body, the Publishers’ Association (PA), has brought out a 10-point “action plan”. Last month it staged its second Inclusivity in Publishing day with London book fair, where culture minister Matt Hancock gave a keynote speech (although the £200 price tag of a single ticket was somewhat ironic for a conference tackling social exclusion).

Some schemes show promising signs. Penguin’s WriteNow campaign, which connects aspiring writers from socially excluded communities to agents, editors and authors, is helping to demystify these professions. The charity Creative Access has enabled publishers to recruit and pay BAME interns (although its government funding was cut by £2m last year). Some literary festivals such as Cheltenham, Henley and Bradford are programming inclusively to improve the 1% national average of BAME panellists. Sarah Shaffi and Wei-Ming Kam have co-founded the BAME in Publishing network. WBN, for its part, has rethought its submissions process so that the cost is not prohibitive to smaller presses and out of 26 titles on its 2017 list, eight were by BAME authors.

It appears to be a turning point for British publishing, and yet those who have been around for long enough feel a profound sense of deja vu, not least because there have been mentorship schemes and initiatives before, yet the industry has always failed to maintain the diversity it has achieved. And where some publishers continue to reach for “schemes” or blame blockages elsewhere in the pipeline, independent publishers such as Canongate, Oneworld, Bloomsbury and Unbound have long been weaving inclusivity into their lists without the need for formal targets or traineeships.

Margaret Busby, the writer and pioneering publisher, regards the endeavour for better representation in publishing as a Sisyphean struggle begun decades ago and still no closer to being won. Mainstream publishing, she says, is too institutionalised in its biases to be corrected by a few new authors or schemes.

In the 1980s she helped to found Greater Access to Publishing (GAP), a group that campaigned to diversify the industry. An article she co-wrote with Virago publisher Lennie Goodings for the trade press in 1988 posed questions that are still being asked today, such as: “What are publishers doing to make their companies a more accurate reflection of their lists, readers and society?”

A decade later, the Arts Council brought in publishing traineeships for black and Asian candidates, whom Busby mentored. Another Arts Council scheme followed 10 years later to address representation in the workforce. In 2005, the Diversity in Publishing Network (Dipnet) was started and after that, Equip, a Publishing Equalities Charter in 2012. “What’s happening now is more initiatives,” Busby says. “But the problem can’t be solved with initiatives.”

There is overwhelming agreement among excluded communities that systemic change can only happen when inclusivity is filtered upwards. There is not yet gender parity on boards, even though women outnumber men in the industry; a lack of social diversity is one of its most stubborn problems and there are only a handful of BAME publishing executives who hold the power to buy books.

One change that has been universally praised is Little, Brown’s high-level appointment of Sharmaine Lovegrove as publisher of Dialogue Books, a new inclusive imprint. She has been in the job for five months but feels that even with these latest schemes, the industry is far from egalitarian: “It feels to me incredibly traditional and in need of rejuvenation in order to future-proof. For decades, you have had white, middle-class people acquiring books by white, middle-class people. I’m a black, middle-class woman who lives in London with Jamaican heritage and I speak German, having lived and worked in Berlin. All of that, when I’m looking for stories, makes my prism much wider than that of some of my colleagues in the broader industry, yet my difference highlights an issue rather than being celebrated for its insights, and that is exhausting.”

Lovegrove did not rise through the ranks but forged a 20-year career outside mainstream publishing (as a literary scout, a bookseller and literary editor of Elle). But why does inclusivity have to have its own ring-fenced imprint? Shouldn’t it be part of every imprint rather than becoming its own distinctive brand?

And exceptionalism can bring its own burdens; when the few representatives who have reached the higher echelons leave their posts, the system reverts back to type, argues Kadija George, the publisher of SABLE LitMag, one of Britain’s oldest publications for writers of colour. “When the [African-born] editor Ellah Wakatama Allfrey was at Jonathan Cape, she brought in authors of colour. When she left, it went back to the way it was before. What happens when Sharmaine Lovegrove leaves? It’s the equivalent of letting one person into Oxford but not giving them any support and expecting them to fly. It’s how to get that second and third person in there.”

Allfrey, who co-founded her own independent press, Indigo, last month, feels that recruitment in itself is not the solution. “The real issue is retention – making sure the recruits are still there in 10 or 20 years’ time.”

Sharmilla Beezmohun was mentored by Busby in 1993 in an Arts Council scheme and now runs a live literary events company, Speaking Volumes. “In my time with the big publishers, I felt I didn’t speak the language that other people spoke. I and many others took sideways steps. Ten years later, the Arts Council revived the scheme. Where has this second cohort ended up? Again, taking sideways steps. It doesn’t matter how many schemes you have. If there is a glass ceiling, people will continue to move sideways and to do their own independent work.”

Few, though, can deny that the fortunes of some authors have transformed in recent times. BAME writing is in demand and being spoken of as its own “market”. What is striking among these writers is that they were not championed by the establishment but found a way to publication through alternative streams. The writer and campaigner Nikesh Shukla put together an anthology of BAME writing, The Good Immigrant, because he felt these voices were not being heard, and crowdfunded it with the publisher, Unbound, in 2016. It has showcased a host of new talent and sold 60,000 copies.

Reni Eddo-Lodge was in the anthology and this year released her book, Why I’m No Longer Talking to White People About Race, which grew out of a blog. Published in June, it has become a bestseller and was longlisted for the Baillie Gifford prize for non-fiction. Added to this has been the surprise success of Oneworld, whose authors – Marlon James and Paul Beatty, both black and little known in Britain – won the Man Booker prize successively in 2015 and 2016.

These commercial and critical successes have proved what had been doubted in the traditional industry for so long: that non-white writers can attract audiences, and sales. The next wave of young black authors to be causing a stir have been taken up by big imprints – Afua Hirsch’s bookBrit(ish) is being published by Jonathan Cape, while Yomi Adegoke and Elizabeth Uviebinene’s debut, Slay in Your Lane: The Black Girl Bible, was bought in a nine-way auction by 4th Estate.

While Shukla acknowledges that there is greater visibility for writers of colour, he is torn between that optimism and the fear that “skin colour is being seen as a trend and not something that’s about societal good”. He has heard the industry talking about “black girls [being] on trend”, and Lovegrove feels that its integrity is undermined by the problematic politics of this labelling. “I’ve heard it described as ‘this marketplace of BAME authors’, which is triggering given the slave trade … It signifies that those who are leading this, even with the best intentions, have little concept of how to talk about people from a range of backgrounds.”

Although greater numbers of BAME authors give the impression of widening inclusivity, these writers, for all their achievements, are often expected to write about identity whatever their chosen genre. Abir Mukherjee is among a dynamic new circle of British Asian crime novelists that includes AA Dhand, Imran Mahmood and Alexander Khan; he has been told that his work is not “authentically Asian enough”, even though his debut, A Rising Man, recently won the CWA Endeavour Dagger for historical crime fiction. “Would you ask a writer from Northern Ireland only to write about the Troubles?” he asks.

The 2015 Spread the Word report showed that BAME writers were much less likely to have ongoing support and many still report this to be the case. So what you end up with is “fragmentation”, says Dee Jarrett-Macauley, chair of the board of trustees at the Caine prize for African writing and the first black chair in its 18-year history. “You have flavours of the month, you have two black Booker winners, you have schemes.”

Eddo-Lodge certainly felt unsupported by the infrastructure: “Opportunities opened up to me once I had proved myself. There was no wider support. It was just me plugging away mostly by myself. Many times I thought about quitting. The only time I felt invested in was when Bloomsbury took me on. They pulled out all the guns. I remember my first meeting with them, thinking: ‘What just happened?’”

And while there is a greater buzz around inclusive works, it is still largely being produced outside mainstream spaces: small presses such as Cassava Republic and Jacaranda Books have shown dynamism despite limited resources. Shukla has crowd-funded another Unbound anthology, Rife, and also a quarterly journal for BAME voices, the Good Journal, to run its issues across a year.

The Barelit literary festival – which was set up in 2016 out of frustration at the lack of diversity in Britain’s festival culture – crowdfunded its £11,000 overheads and attracted around 450 people in its first year and 600 this year, despite no marketing budget.

Syima Aslam and Irna Qureshi, two British Asians from Bradford, set up a festival for their city in 2015, financing it themselves and embedding inclusivity into the core of their programming. It has grown and attracted significant Arts Council funding as well as private sponsorship.

Many have hailed these projects as the “new mainstream”, which combines an inclusive outlook with alternative funding streams and online social media technology used to spread the word. The aim is to hit mainstream publishing with a ripple effect and some, including the writer and campaigner Sunny Singh, feel a “great amount of institutional resistance” to it but also that “an enormous number of people are not only galvanised but working with each other. I have seen it build this past year. It’s a new energy”.

The question of ongoing resource and reach remains, though, despite the solidarity and imagination in this “alternative” mainstream. The author Kit de Waal, who has campaigned energetically against class prejudice in publishing, says much of her work feels like “trying to kick a door down from the outside”. It is time that the industry “offered us a seat at the table”.

If that seat is not offered, the future for small, innovative initiatives remains financially unstable, pitted as they are against a far more powerful traditional system. What happens to the Good Journal when its first year of funding is used up, for example? And how viable will smaller presses be if they are left to take all the risks, with big publishers rocking in to buy up the authors they have championed through the early stages, once they begin to win prizes?

Louise Doughty, the novelist who is championing a BAME bursary for the MA in creative writing at UEA, feels a moral urgency for mainstream inclusion: “Recent political developments – Brexit, the rise of Trump – have seen an explosion of pernicious and divisive narratives in our public discourse, the use of othering and scapegoating as political tools. It’s in everybody’s interests for those narratives to be countered.”

If the moral argument is not convincing enough, there is another, more market-driven incentive for British publishing to address its problems with inclusivity, and that is to stop it becoming a faded industry on the global landscape. Some suggest that Britain is facing the prospect of a brain drain of BAME writers to Europe and America, where inclusivity is better embraced.

Aminatta Forna, a British novelist who teaches at Georgetown University in Washington DC, thinks that resistance to inclusion is already Britain’s loss. “There’s a black brain drain of authors to the US just as we have seen with black actors who became frustrated with the limited parts on offer in the UK: Zadie Smith, Hari Kunzru, Chris Abani, Caryl Phillips, Salman Rushdie, Fred D’Aguiar. Unless and until the publishing world realises that, nothing will change.” Beezmohun too has found that British writers of colour pull in big audiences, and translation deals, in Europe. “We take them to perform in tours and they sell out.”

From this standpoint, inclusivity might be more urgently needed by traditional publishing than by those it – however unconsciously – excludes. “It talks about inclusivity as if it is doing it for ‘us’,” says Lovegrove, who likens the culture of the bigger publishing houses to accountancy firms. “What it has fundamentally misunderstood is that ‘we’ don’t need saving. The industry desperately needs to flip the narrative and realise it needs us to become more dynamic, more agile, more creative. Its business model for the next generation depends on it.”

三级笔译英译汉文章来源:

Improved human well-being is one of the modern era’s greatest triumphs. The age of plenty has also led to an unexpected global health crisis: two billion people are either overweight or obese. Developed countries have been especially susceptible to unhealthy weight gain, a trend that could be considered the price of abundance. However, developing countries are now facing a similar crisis.

Obesity rates have plateaued in high income countries but are accelerating elsewhere. The combined findings of UNICEF, the World Health Organisation and the World Bank showed that in 2016 Asia was home to half the world’s overweight children. One quarter were in Africa.

Residents of developing nation cities are increasingly susceptible to obesity, particularly amid the megatrends of urbanisation, globalisation, and industrialisation of food supply. According to India’s National Institute of Nutrition, over a quarter of urban-dwelling men and nearly half of women are overweight.

The majority of the world’s future urbanisation is projected to occur in developing countries, particularly in Asia and Africa. As rural dwellers move to urban areas, easy access to cheap and convenient processed foods lures them into unhealthy diets.

This crisis will test the political resolve of governments that have historically focused on ending hunger. These governments must understand that the factors making cities convenient and productive also make their residents prone to obesity. Intelligent, focused policies are needed to effectively manage this emerging crisis.

Urban lifestyles

Urbanites enjoy a variety of culinary options, ranging from aisles of processed goods in supermarkets to scores of short-order street vendors. Additionally, international fast food chains are flourishing in developing countries. This is shifting dietary habits away from healthier traditional fare and towards fried foods and sugary drinks.

The health risks of such diets are compounded by the sedentary lifestyles of urban dwellers. The most recent Indian nutrition survey found that city-dwelling men and women work an average of roughly eight hours a day. Most are engaged in sedentary office jobs. Only about one quarter exercise.

People’s leisure time is also being monopolised by passive diversions like television, movies, and video games in the growing number of households able to afford such technologies.

The alarming implication of these trends is that developing countries may become sick before they get rich. That sickness may, in turn, cripple health systems.

The yearly health care costs in Southeast Asia of obesity-related complications like diabetes and cardiovascular disease are already as high as US $10 billion. Obesity among China’s younger generation could cost US $724 billion in medical treatment by 2030. Such diseases are an added burden on countries already struggling to manage primary health care needs.

Policies related to taxation, urban design, education and awareness and the promotion of localised food systems may help control obesity at a lower cost than eventual medical treatment for an ageing and increasingly overweight population.

Direct interventions

Some governments have already experimented with direct interventions to control obesity, such as taxation on unhealthy foods and drinks. The US pioneered the soda tax movementThailandBrunei, and Singapore have adopted similar measures. South Africa is likely to introduce a sugar tax beginning in April 2018.

Regulatory approaches have not stopped at taxation – or at sugar. In the United Kingdom, advertising rules prohibit the marketing of foods high in fat, salt and sugar to children younger than 16.

The city of Berkeley in California recognises that taxes alone are not enough to address obesity. Proceeds from the city’s sugar tax are used to support child nutrition and community health programmes. This underscores the importance of education and awareness.

There is also promise in broader-reaching initiatives. Urban design holds significant power to reshape lifestyle patterns and public health. Improving the attractiveness of public space, the “walkability” of neighbourhoods and the quality of cycling infrastructure can draw residents out of their cars and living rooms.

A recent study of urban neighbourhoods in Shanghai and Hangzhou found that middle-income residents living in less walkable neighbourhoods had significantly higher Body Mass Indices than both richer and poorer residents who lived in walkable neighbourhoods in urban China.

Finally, healthier lifestyles begin in grocery store aisles. Governments should encourage tighter connections between agricultural production systems, urban grocers and food vendors. Relationships with farmers in areas immediately adjacent to cities, in addition to the promotion of urban gardens, have been popular approaches in the US.

Such initiatives can also help urban residents better understand the mechanics of food sourcing. This raises awareness about the relationship between natural foods and healthy lifestyles. Even the preservation of culture around traditional foods can promote healthy alternatives.

Combining controls on unhealthy foods with policies that incentivise healthy eating and active lifestyles constitute a promising response to rising obesity rates. Addressing public health is a policy mandate for developing countries from both an economic and social point of view. To paraphrase the recent Global Nutrition Report, addressing obesity is a global imperative for releasing the brakes on development.

The world isn't getting smaller, it's getting fatter, according to a comprehensive report published Thursday in The Lancet.

Whether you're looking at men or women, children or adults, citizens of rich countries or poor ones, people were much more likely to be overweight or obese in 2013 than they were in 1980, the study found.

In 1980 – the year Pac-Man was unleashed on the world and John Lennon was assassinated – there were 857 million people on the planet who were either overweight or obese. Thirty-three years later, the comparable figure was 2.1 billion.It’s not just that the global population grew (and thus the number of people with too many pounds on their frames). The proportion of men who were overweight or obese rose from 28.8% in 1980 to 36.9% in 2013, while the proportion of women in that category increased from 29.8% to 38% during the same period, the report said.

In developed countries, 16.9% of boys and 16.2% of girls were overweight or obese in 1980. By 2013, those figures were 23.8% and 22.6% respectively. Even in developing countries, the prevalence of overweight and obesity among boys rose from 8.1% to 12.9% and the prevalence among girls grew from 8.4% to 13.4%, the researchers found.

All over the world, the passage of time was marked by bigger waistlines. "Successive cohorts seemed to be gaining weight at all ages, including childhood and adolescence," the researchers found. The most rapid period of weight gain came between the ages of 20 and 40.

A few extra pounds may seem harmless, but their cumulative effect is serious, public health experts say. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warns that being overweight or obese will increase your risk of such life-threatening conditions as coronary heart disease, Type 2 diabetes, stroke and certain types of cancer, among other problems. A 2010 study in The Lancet estimated that overweight and obesity caused 3.4 million deaths worldwide.

For the new study, dozens of researchers from around the world worked together to compile accurate statistics for 183 countries. They focused on rates of overweight (defined as a body mass index of 25 or greater) and obesity (defined as BMI of at least 30) in the years between 1980 and 2013. (The massive effort was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which did not influence the study design or its findings.)  

Tonga had the dubious distinction of having a majority of the adult population considered obese. In addition, six other countries had obesity rates above 50% for women: Kuwait, Kiribati, the Federated States of Micronesia, Libya, Qatar and Samoa.

The United States earned special mention for its "high prevalence of obesity" – 31.6% of men and 33.9% of women. The researchers noted that 13% of the world's 671 million obese individuals live in the U.S. – more than any other country.

Indeed, more than half of the world's obese people lived in just 10 countries in 2013: The U.S., China, India, Russia, Brazil, Mexico, Egypt, Germany, Pakistan and Indonesia. China and India actually had "low" rates of obesity – only 3.8% of Chinese men and 5% of Chinese women were obese in 2013, along with only 3.7% of Indian men and 4.2% of Indian women. But both countries are so populous that they still came in at No. 2 and No. 3 on the worldwide list.

Perhaps this was the most depressing finding in the entire 16-page report: "No countries had significant decreases in obesity in the past 33 years."

In a commentary that accompanies the study, epidemiologist Klim McPherson wondered what it would take for the world to get serious about reining in weight gain and returning BMIs to levels to where they were 30 years ago.

"Public health efforts are leading to progress in tobacco control and cardioprotective diets in a slow and deliberate way. As a result, deaths caused by smoking-related diseases and cardiovascular diseases are decreasing," wrote McPherson, a visiting professor at the University of Oxford. "Can a similar success with weight ever happen?"

Probably not any time soon, he conceded. For policymakers, tackling obesity is like tackling climate change: Experts have a good idea of what needs to be done, but there is simply no political will to make such radical changes.

“Where is the international will to act decisively in a way that might restrict economic growth in a competitive world, for the public’s health?” McPerson wrote. “Nowhere yet, but … politicians can no longer hide behind ignorance or confusion.”

三级笔译英文章来源:

煤炭是地球上储量最丰富、最容易得到的能源,但目前反对使用煤炭的声浪之高已超过以往任何时候。

造成煤炭需求增速下降这一现状的,不仅是因为煤炭巨大的碳排放量引起气候变化的担忧,与其经济效益下降也有一定关系,煤炭与其他能源相比,竞争力已经有所下降了。

以美国为例,页岩油气的繁荣造成部分煤炭因价格过高而被排挤出市场。美国最大的矿业公司博地能源公司(PeabodyEnergy)表示,由于天然气价格下跌,今年美国的煤炭需求量将减少6000万吨到8000万吨。美国能源情报署表示,美国去年的煤炭需求量接近9.2亿短吨(1短吨约合0.91吨)。

根据世界煤炭协会(WorldCoalAssociation)的数据,煤炭提供了全球约30%的一次能源和40%以上的电力。在中国和印度,煤炭所满足的能源需求比重甚至达到70%左右。

国际能源署(IEA)预计,到2040年,全球煤炭需求每年的增速仅为0.5%,而过去30年的年均增速为2.5%。国际能源署表示,美国的煤炭用量到2040年将下降三分之一,中国也有望在2030年到达峰值。过去10年中的大部分时间,中国巨大的煤炭需求维持了煤炭市场的活跃。

实际上,中国的煤炭消费量在2014年已经下滑,煤炭进口量下降了11%,这是10年来的首次下降。中国的经济增速已经放缓,同时也做出极大努力减少煤炭的消费量以减少污染。由于现在中国的燃煤发电厂运行的时间较以前有所减少,再加上煤炭供应充足,造成国际煤炭价格被压低。动力煤出口基准价格从2011年的峰值下跌了约60%。

如果中国致力于减少煤炭使用,它将借鉴发达国家所作出的努力。美国出台了新的《汞及大气有毒物排放标准》(MercuryandAirToxicsStandards,简称MATS),若得到贯彻落实,预计到2018年,美国的燃煤发电能力将减少6000万千瓦,相当于总装机容量的五分之一左右。美国还在酝酿更严格的规定,这就是美国环保局的《清洁能源计划》(CleanPowerPlan)。该计划旨在减少化石能源发电所造成的碳排放。到2020年,美国煤炭需求量可能因此减少四分之一,但煤炭公司正竭力反对该举措,博地能源公司认为环保局出这些规定“大大越权”。

煤炭企业该怎么办?发展中国家的增长仍是一大希望。嘉能可公司(Glencore)负责人指出,2025年,亚洲煤炭需求量预计将增加10亿吨,这比目前动力煤海上贸易的总量还多,而预计增量中的一半将来自中国以外的地区。

煤炭需求很大程度上取决于全球向低碳经济过渡的节奏。如果所有已宣布的削减碳排放的政策改革得不到有效执行,预计煤炭需求还会更加强劲。

随着中国多年来强劲的煤炭需求增速的放缓,印度正逐渐成为煤炭行业维持强劲需求的希望所在。

印度是全球第二人口大国,其经济仍严重依赖煤炭,能源需求有一半以上要靠煤炭满足。纳伦德拉˙莫迪(NarendraModi)当选印度总理后,很多人认为他将致力于煤炭的开发。莫迪被认为是改革派,致力于加快印度经济的增长。必和必拓集团高管迈克˙亨利(MikeHenry)去年曾对投资者表示:“印度的增长故事正开始吸引人们的注意。”

国际能源署预计,到2020年,印度将超过美国成为全球第二大煤炭消费国。国际能源署还预测印度将超过中国成为动力煤最大进口国。煤炭出口国能从印度的这一转变中获得多大利益,可能要取决于印度国内煤炭行业的发展速度。

国有企业印度煤炭公司(CoalIndia)被要求在未来5年将产量翻一番,这是一个宏伟的目标。印度可能因此成为一个更加重要的国际煤炭市场参与国。

国际能源署预计,未来5年印度的煤炭需求将增加2.5亿吨,这一增幅超过目前除中国和美国以外其他任何国家的煤炭消费量。但该机构也表示:“世上没有第二个中国。”

二级笔译汉译英文章来源:(摘自:推动共建丝绸之路经济带和21世纪海上丝绸之路的愿景与行动)  

2000 多年前, 亚欧大陆上勤劳勇敢的人民, 探索出多条连接亚欧非几大文明的贸易和人文交流通路, 后人将其统称为 “丝绸之路”。千百年来, “和平合作、开放包容、互学互鉴、 互利共赢 ”的丝绸之路精神薪火相传,推进了人类文明进步,是促进沿线各国繁荣发展的重要纽带,是东西方交流
合作的象征,是世界各国共有的历史文化遗产。 

More than two millennia ago the diligent and courageous people of Eurasia explored and opened up several routes of trade and cultural exchanges that linked the major civilizations of Asia,Europe and Africa, collectively called the Silk Road by later generations. For thousands of years, the Silk Road Spirit - "peace and cooperation, openness and inclusiveness, mutual learning and mutual benefit" - has been passed from generation to generation, promoted the progress of human civilization, and contributed greatly to the prosperity and development of the countries along the Silk Road. Symbolizing communication and cooperation between the East and the West, the Silk Road Spirit is a historic and cultural heritage shared by all countries around the world. 

当今世界正发生复杂深刻的变化,国际金融危机深层次影响继续显现,世界经济缓慢复苏、发展分化,国际投资贸易格局和多边投资贸易规则酝酿深刻调整,各国面临的发展问题依然严峻。共建“一带一路”顺应世界多极化、经济全球化、文化多样化、社会信息化的潮流,秉持开放的区域合作精神,致力于维护全球自由贸易体系和开放型世界经济。共建“一带一路”旨在促进经济要素有序自由流动、资源高效配置和市场深度融合,推动沿线各国实现经济政策协调,开展更大范围、更高水平、
更深层次的区域合作,共同打造开放、包容、均衡、普惠的区域经济合作架构。共建“一带一路”符合国际社会的根本利益,彰显人类社会共同理想和美好追求,是国际合作以及全球治理新模式的积极探索,将为世界和平发展增添新的正能量。 

Complex and profound changes are taking place in the world. The underlying impact of the international financial crisis keeps emerging; the world economy is recovering slowly, and global development is uneven; the international trade and investment landscape and rules for multilateral trade and investment are undergoing major adjustments; and countries still face big challenges to their development. The initiative tojointly build the Belt and Road, embracing the trend toward a multipolar world, economic globalization, cultural diversity and greater IT application, is designed to uphold the global free trade regime and the openworld economy in the spirit of open regional cooperation. It is aimed at promoting orderly and free flow of economic factors, highly efficient allocation of resources and deep integration of markets; encouraging the
countries along the Belt and Road to achieve economic policy coordination and carry out broader and more in-depth regional coo peration of higher standards; and jointly creating an open, inclusive and balanced regional economic cooperation architecture that benefits all. Jointly building the Belt and Road is in the interests of the world community. Reflecting the common ideals and pursuit of human societies, it is a positive endeavor to seek new models of international cooperation and global governance, and will inject new positive energy into world peace and development. 











鲜花

握手

雷人

路过

鸡蛋
返回顶部
用手机微信扫一扫