Level 5 Reading 5A

Reading 5A

阅读5A

OUR ENERGY DIET With a little effort, and not much money, most of us could reduce our energy diets by 25 percent or more. So, what's holding us back ? Writer Peter Miller goes on a strict low-carbon diet to find out. Not long ago, my wife and I tried a new diet— not to lose weight but to answer a question about climate change. Scientists have reported that the world is heating up even faster than they predicted just a few years ago. The consequences, they say, could be severe if we don't keep reducing emissions of carbon dioxide(CO2) and other greenhouse gases that are trapping heat in our atmosphere. But what can we do about it as individuals? And will our efforts really make any difference? The Experiment We decided to try an experiment: For one month we would track our personal emissions of CO2 as if we were counting calories. We wanted to see how much we could cut back. The average U.S. household produces about 80 kilos of CO2 a day by doing commonplace things like turning on air conditioning or driving cars. This is more than twice the European average and almost five times the global average. But how much should we try to reduce? I checked with Tim Flannery, author of The Weather Makers: How Man Is Changing the Climate and What It Means for Life on Earth. In his book, he challenged readers to make deep cuts in personal emissions to keep the world from reaching critical tipping points, such as the melting of the ice sheets in Greenland or West

我们的能量饮食 只需稍加努力，也不需要多少钱， 我们大多数人可以将能量饮食减少25%或更多。 那么，是什么阻碍了我们？ 作家彼得·米勒通过严格的低碳饮食来寻找答案。 不久前，我和妻子尝试了一种新的饮食-- 不是为了减肥，而是为了回答一个关于气候变化的问题。 科学家们报告说，世界正在变暖 甚至比他们几年前预测的还要快。 他们说，如果我们不继续减少二氧化碳的排放，后果可能会很严重 以及其他将热量困在大气中的温室气体。 但作为个人，我们能做些什么呢？ 我们的努力真的会有所不同吗？ 实验 我们决定做一个实验： 在一个月的时间里，我们会像计算卡路里一样追踪我们个人的二氧化碳排放量。 我们想看看我们能削减多少。 美国家庭平均每天产生约80公斤的二氧化碳 通过做一些普通的事情，比如打开空调或开车。 这是欧洲平均水平的两倍多，几乎是全球平均水平的五倍。 但是我们应该减少多少呢？ 我咨询了《天气制造者》的作者蒂姆·弗兰纳里： 人类如何改变气候，这对地球上的生命意味着什么。 在他的书中，他鼓励读者大幅削减个人排放 为了防止世界达到临界点， 例如格陵兰岛或西部冰盖的融化

Antarctica. "To stay below that threshold, we need to reduce CO2 emissions by 80 percent," he said. "That sounds like a lot," my wife said. "Can we really do that?" lt seemed unlikely to me, too. Still, the point was to answer a simple question: How close could we come to a lifestyle the planet could handle? Finally, we agreed to aim for 80 percentless than the U.S. average: a daily diet of about 13 kilograms of CO2, Our first challenge was to find ways to convert our daily activities into kilos of CO2, We wanted to track our progress as we went so that we could change our habits if necessary. To get a rough idea of our current carbon footprint, I put numbers from recent utility bills into several calculators on websites. The results that came out were not very flattering. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) website figured our annual CO2, emissions at 24,618 kilos, 30 percent higher than the average U.S. family with two people. The main culprit was the energy we were using to heat and cool our house. Clearly we had further to go than I thought. The Diagnosis We got some help in Week Two from a professional " house doctor," Ed Minch of Energy Services Group in Wilmington, Delaware, who we asked to do an energy audit of our house. The first thing he did was to walk around the outside of the house to see if the architect and builder had created any opportunities for air to seep in or out, such as overhanging floors. Next, he went inside and used an infrared scanner to look at our interior walls. Finally, his assistants set up a powerful fan in our front door to lower air pressure inside the house and force air through whatever leaks there might be in the shell of the house. Our house, his instruments showed, was 50 percent leakier than it should be. Addressing this became a priority, as heating represents up to half of a house's energy costs, and cooling can account for a tenth. Minch also gave us tips about lighting and appliances. "A typical kitchen these days has ten 75-watt spots on all day," he said, "and that's a huge waste of money." Replacing them with compact fluorescents could save a homeowner $200 a year. Refrigerators, washing machines, dishwashers, and other appliances, in fact, may represent half of a household's electric bill. Everywhere I looked, I saw things sucking up energy. One night I sat up in bed and counted ten little lights in the darkness: cell phonecharger, desktop calculator, laptop computer, printer, clock radio, cable TV box, camera battery recharger, carbon monoxide detector, cordless phone base, smoke detector. What were they all doing? One study found that "vampire" power sucked up by electronics in stand by mode can add up to 25 percent of a house's electric bill. "You can go nuts thinking about everything in your house that uses power," said Jennifer Thorne Amann, author of Consumer Guide to Home Energy Savings. "You have to use common sense and prioritize. Don't agonize too much, and think about what you'll be able to sustain after the experiment is over. If you have trouble reaching your goal in one area, remember there's always something else you can do."

南极洲。他说：“为了保持在这一阈值以下，我们需要将二氧化碳排放量减少80%。”。 “听起来很多，”我妻子说。“我们真的能做到吗？” 我也觉得不太可能。 不过，关键是要回答一个简单的问题： 我们离地球能够承受的生活方式有多近？ 最后，我们同意将目标定为比美国平均水平低80%： 每天摄入约13公斤二氧化碳， 我们的第一个挑战是找到将我们的日常活动转化为二氧化碳的方法， 我们想边走边跟踪我们的进展 这样我们就可以在必要时改变我们的习惯。 为了大致了解我们目前的碳足迹， 我把最近水电费账单上的数字放进网站上的几个计算器里。 结果并不令人满意。 美国环境保护局（EPA）网站 计算出我们的年二氧化碳排放量为24618公斤， 比美国两人家庭的平均水平高出30%。 罪魁祸首是我们用来给房子供暖和制冷的能源。 显然，我们还有比我想象的更远的路要走。 诊断 在第二周，我们得到了一位专业“家庭医生”的帮助 特拉华州威尔明顿能源服务集团的Ed Minch， 我们请谁对我们的房子进行能源审计。 他做的第一件事就是在房子外面走来走去 看看建筑师和建筑商 为空气渗入或渗出创造了任何机会，比如悬垂的地板。 接下来，他走进屋里，用红外扫描仪查看了我们的内墙。 最后，他的助手们在我们家门口架起了一个强大的扇子 降低房子里的气压 并迫使空气通过房屋外壳中可能存在的任何泄漏。 他的仪器显示，我们的房子比应有的泄漏率高出50%。 解决这个问题成为当务之急， 因为供暖占房屋能源成本的一半，制冷占十分之一。 Minch还为我们提供了关于照明和电器的建议。 他说：“如今，一个典型的厨房一整天都有10个75瓦的插座。”， “这是巨大的浪费。” 用紧凑型荧光灯代替它们可以为房主每年节省200美元。 事实上，冰箱、洗衣机、洗碗机和其他电器， 可能占家庭电费的一半。 无论我往哪里看，我都看到有东西在吸收能量。 一天晚上，我坐在床上，数着黑暗中的十盏小灯： 手机充电器、台式计算器、笔记本电脑、打印机、时钟收音机、有线电视盒、， 相机电池充电器、一氧化碳探测器、无绳电话底座、烟雾探测器。 他们都在做什么？ 一项研究发现，在待机模式下，电子设备会吸收“吸血鬼”的能量 可以加起来占房子电费的25%。 “想到家里所有用电的东西，你都会发疯的。” 《家庭节能消费者指南》的作者Jennifer Thorne Amann说。 “你必须运用常识，分清轻重缓急。 不要太痛苦， 想想实验结束后你能维持什么。 如果你在某个领域难以实现目标， 记住，你总有别的办法。”

The Results By the last week in July, we were finally getting into the flow of the reduced carbon lifestyle. We walked to the neighborhood pool instead of driving, biked to the local farmers market on Saturday morning, and sat out on the deck until dark, chatting over the sound of the crickets. Whenever possible I worked from home, and when I commuted, I took the bus and subway. Our numbers were looking pretty good, in fact, when we crossed the finish line on August 1. Compared with the previous July, we had cut electricity use by 70 percent, natural gas by 40 percent, and reduced our driving to half the national average. In terms of CO2, we trimmed our emissions to an average of 32 kilograms a day, which, though twice as much as we'd targeted as our goal, was still about half the national average. We can do more, of course. We can sign up with our utility company for power from regional wind farms. We can purchase locally grown foods instead of winter raspberries from Chile and bottled water from Fiji. We can join a carbon-reduction club, or set up one of our own. The Future What we really wanted to know was whether it would make any difference. Our low-carbon diet had shown us that, with little or no hardship and no major cash outlays, we could cut day-to-day emissions of CO2, in half— mainly by using less energy at home and on the highway. Similar efforts in office buildings, shopping malls, and factories throughout the nation, combined with incentives and efficiency standards, could halt further increases in U.S. emissions. Yet efficiency, in the end, can only take us so far. To get the deeper reductions we need , as Tim Flannery advised, we must replace fossil fuels faster with energy from wind farms, solar plants, geothermal facilities, and biofuels. We must slow deforestation, which contributes to the build up of greenhouse gases, and we must develop technologies to capture and bury carbon dioxide from existing power plants. Efficiency can buy us time—perhaps as much as two decades— to figure out how to remove carbon from the world's diet. Not that there won't still be obstacles. Every sector of our economy faces challenges, says energy-efficiency guru Amory Lovins of the Rocky Mountain Institute. "But they all have huge potential. I don't know anyone who has failed to make money at energy efficiency. There's so much low-hanging fruit, it's falling off the trees and mushing up around our ankles. "The rest of the world isn't waiting for the United States to show the way. Sweden has pioneered carbon-neutral houses, Germany affordable solar power, Japan fuel-efficient cars, China wind-power installations, the Netherlands prosperous cities filled with bicycles. Does the United States have the will to match such efforts? Change starts at home with the replacement of a light bulb, the opening of a window, a walk to the bus, or a bike ride to the post office. My wife and I did it for only a month, but I can see the low-carbon diet becoming a habit. As my wife said, "What do we have to lose?"

结果 到7月的最后一周， 我们终于开始适应低碳生活方式了。 我们步行去附近的游泳池，而不是开车， 周六早上骑自行车去当地农贸市场， 在甲板上坐到天黑，边听蟋蟀的叫声边聊天。 只要有可能，我就在家工作，上下班时，我坐公共汽车和地铁。 我们的数据看起来相当不错， 事实上，当我们在8月1日冲过终点线时。 与去年7月相比，我们的用电量减少了70%， 天然气产量下降了40%，我们的驾驶量减少到全国平均水平的一半。 就二氧化碳而言，我们将排放量减少到平均每天32公斤， 虽然这是我们目标的两倍， 仍然是全国平均水平的一半左右。 当然，我们可以做得更多。 我们可以与我们的公用事业公司签约，从区域风电场获得电力。 我们可以购买当地种植的食物，而不是智利的冬树莓 以及来自斐济的瓶装水。 我们可以加入一个碳减排俱乐部，或者成立一个自己的俱乐部。 未来 我们真正想知道的是，这是否会有所不同。 我们的低碳饮食向我们表明，在几乎没有困难或没有重大现金支出的情况下， 我们可以将每天的二氧化碳排放量减少一半-- 主要是在家里和高速公路上使用更少的能源。 全国各地的办公楼、购物中心和工厂也采取了类似的措施， 结合激励措施和效率标准，可以阻止美国排放的进一步增加。 然而，效率最终只能让我们走这么远。 正如蒂姆·弗兰纳里所建议的那样，为了获得我们需要的更深入的削减， 我们必须更快地用风力发电场的能源取代化石燃料， 太阳能发电厂、地热设施和生物燃料。 我们必须减缓森林砍伐，因为森林砍伐会导致温室气体的积聚， 我们必须开发技术来捕获和掩埋现有发电厂的二氧化碳。 效率可以为我们争取时间——也许高达二十年-- 找出如何从世界饮食中去除碳。 并不是说不会有障碍。 能源效率专家表示，我们经济的每个部门都面临着挑战 落基山研究所的阿莫里·洛文斯。 “但他们都有巨大的潜力。 我不知道有谁在能源效率方面没能赚钱。 有这么多低垂的水果，它从树上掉下来，粘在我们的脚踝上。 “世界其他国家并没有等待美国指明方向。 瑞典已经开创了碳中和住宅， 德国负担得起的太阳能， 日本节能汽车、中国风力发电设施、， 荷兰繁荣的城市到处都是自行车。 美国是否有意愿配合这些努力？ 改变从家里开始，更换灯泡， 打开窗户，步行去公共汽车，或者骑自行车去邮局。 我和妻子只做了一个月， 但我可以看到低碳饮食成为一种习惯。 正如我妻子所说，“我们有什么可失去的？”

♪

♪