2. 职称英语
  3. Damian Carrington’s description of this week’s Panorama is strident, inaccur

Damian Carrington’s description of this week’s Panorama is strident, inaccur

游客2024-10-15  0
问题     Damian Carrington’s description of this week’s Panorama is strident, inaccurate and also reveals a big green blind spot: renewable technologies are currently expensive and demand subsidy. Present government policy will push up the amount of such energy and the resulting cost to all of us. As someone who believes in the importance of tackling climate change, I fervently wish this wasn’t true. But it is and, unlike some environmentalists, I am not in denial.
    We are all now beginning to pay the big price ticket for the scientists’ demands to halt climate change and the politicians’ consequent promises. Our money will go where their mouths were. Unfortunately this bites just as incomes are under real pressure. The collision between the govern-merit’s ambition and the pain of paying for it led me to pitch the idea to Panorama. I can hardly think of a more legitimate area for Panorama investigation, just because the main political parties and the green movement agree with each other, does not make it off limits: indeed quite the reverse.
    Carrington’s "vast, shocking hole" refers to figures on current costs. But the programme was clearly focused on future bills—so he is highlighting one of many marginal facts not included. I would point towards a gap in his own coverage: failure to mention that we interviewed Sir David King, whose climate change credentials are impeccable and Tom Delay, boss of the Carbon Trust.
    Panorama did not lay all the blame for likely price rises at the green door. A large chunk of the programme was spent explaining how old power stations needed replacing and pricey or volatile foreign gas is mentioned three times. But I make no apology for focusing on policy as that delivers greater certainty of what direction we’re going in—it’s spelt out in the government’s renewable road map—and, as voters, we have some control. Future international energy prices are both unknown and beyond the influence of most of the 3 million people who watched this edition.
    I know there is a battle being waged behind closed doors in Whitehall over the cost and direction of energy policy and the obvious anger of some environmentalists is probably stoked by a belief that we gave succor to the "enemy".
    But my own view—rightly not included in the Panorama—is that much of the government’s policy is right apart, from the pretence that it won’t cost much and if you are ticked off, blame the energy companies. Or, as George Monbiot said in the programme:
    "The government can’t be passive about any of this. If it’s going to invest heavily in wind, it’s gonna have to make the political case for it... (ditto nuclear)... it can’t pretend that it can just drift along and expect people to accept stuff when they are not being told why it is a good idea."
                                              From The Guardian, November 9, 2011 [br] What’s the author’s attitude towards the climate change tackling?
选项 A、not vital
B、not true
C、important
D、unnecessary
答案 C
解析 本题为细节题。根据文章第一段最后一句“unlike some environmentalists，I am not in denial”可知，有些人认为应对气候变化的处理很重要，而我也不反对这个观点，因此选C。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3803029.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)