关于哥本哈根会议的美文700字

热心网友：

拉斯穆森首相阁下，各位同事：

　　此时此刻，全世界几十亿人都在注视着哥本哈根。我们在此表达的意愿和做出的承诺，应当有利于推动人类应对气候变化的历史进程。站在这个讲坛上，我深感责任重大。

　　气候变化是当今全球面临的重大挑战。遏制气候变暖，拯救地球家园，是全人类共同的使命，每个国家和民族，每个企业和个人，都应当责无旁贷地行动起来。

　　近三十年来，中国现代化建设取得的成就已为世人瞩目。在这里我还要告诉各位，中国在发展的进程中高度重视气候变化问题，从中国人民和人类长远发展的根本利益出发，为应对气候变化做出了不懈努力和积极贡献。

　　——中国是最早制定实施《应对气候变化国家方案》的发展中国家。先后制定和修订了节约能源法、可再生能源法、循环经济促进法、清洁生产促进法、森林法、草原法和民用建筑节能条例等一系列法律法规，把法律法规作为应对气候变化的重要手段。

　　——中国是近年来节能减排力度最大的国家。我们不断完善税收制度，积极推进资源性产品价格改革，加快建立能够充分反映市场供求关系、资源稀缺程度、环境损害成本的价格形成机制。全面实施十大重点节能工程和千家企业节能计划，在工业、交通、建筑等重点领域开展节能行动。深入推进循环经济试点，大力推广节能环保汽车，实施节能产品惠民工程。推动淘汰高耗能、高污染的落后产能，2006至2008年共淘汰低能效的炼铁产能6059万吨、炼钢产能 4347万吨、水泥产能1.4亿吨、焦炭产能6445万吨。截至今年上半年，中国单位国内生产总值能耗比2005年降低13%，相当于少排放8亿吨二氧化碳。

　　——中国是新能源和可再生能源增长速度最快的国家。我们在保护生态基础上，有序发展水电，积极发展核电，鼓励支持农村、边远地区和条件适宜地区大力发展生物质能、太阳能、地热、风能等新型可再生能源。2005年至2008年，可再生能源增长51%，年均增长14.7%。2008年可再生能源利用量达到2.5亿吨标准煤。农村有3050万户用上沼气，相当于少排放二氧化碳4900多万吨。水电装机容量、核电在建规模、太阳能热水器集热面积和光伏发电容量均居世界第一位。

　　——中国是世界人工造林面积最大的国家。我们持续大规模开展退耕还林和植树造林，大力增加森林碳汇。2003至2008年，森林面积净增2054万公顷，森林蓄积量净增11.23亿立方米。目前人工造林面积达5400万公顷，居世界第一。

　　中国有13亿人口，人均国内生产总值刚刚超过3000美元，按照联合国标准，还有1.5亿人生活在贫困线以下，发展经济、改善民生的任务十分艰巨。我国正处于工业化、城镇化快速发展的关键阶段，能源结构以煤为主，降低排放存在特殊困难。但是，我们始终把应对气候变化作为重要战略任务。1990至 2005年，单位国内生产总值二氧化碳排放强度下降46%。在此基础上，我们又提出，到2020年单位国内生产总值二氧化碳排放比2005年下降 40%－45%，在如此长时间内这样大规模降低二氧化碳排放，需要付出艰苦卓绝的努力。我们的减排目标将作为约束性指标纳入国民经济和社会发展的中长期规划，保证承诺的执行受到法律和舆论的监督。我们将进一步完善国内统计、监测、考核办法，改进减排信息的披露方式，增加透明度，积极开展国际交流、对话与合作。　

希望可以帮到你。

###

热心网友：

Copenhagen summit ended after the storms did not rainbow

哥 本 哈 根峰会落幕 风雨过后未见彩虹

　The United Nations summit on climate change ended Saturday with a fractious all-night debate over an agreement brokered by China and the U.S. that has no legal force, and is vague on crucial details.

The fundamental disagreements over the appropriate response to climate change among the U.S., China, Europe and a divided group of developing nations led to a near total breakdown of talks during the two-week summit attended by representatives of nearly 200 nations. The non-binding final statement, produced in a flurry of last-minute bargaining led by U.S. President Barack Obama and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, received a tepid endorsement Saturday morning after hours of angry exchanges among frustrated, hungry and tired diplomats, many of whom complained that the final agreement was made without their participation.

The statement said countries would 'enhance our long-term cooperative action to combat climate change,' but it didn't obligate any country to meet a specific emission-reduction target.

The Copenhagen Accord did produce a pledge by rich countries to send billions of dollars to the developing world to help it cope with the effects of climate change and to implement lower-carbon technologies. Industrialized countries said they would provide a pot of money 'approaching' $30 billion over the next three years and to 'commit to a goal of mobilizing' $100 billion annually by 2020.

Yet amid the global recession, no one offered details on where that money might come from. Some analysts who have followed international climate talks for years said the $30 billion pledged appeared mainly to restate previous offers from rich countries. As for the $100 billion a year by 2020, U.S. officials said the vast majority of it would come from the private sector, in particular through the buying and selling of 'carbon credits,' and not from government coffers.

　Negotiators sought to put the best face possible on what they dubbed the Copenhagen Accord, calling it a first step that they hoped to follow up with a more-detailed, and more-enforceable, international climate pact sometime over the next year. But given that negotiators left Copenhagen as divided as ever over how a tougher agreement might affect each of their countries' economic competitiveness, they said they couldn't predict how the process might unfold.

Copenhagen's messy process and vague outcome led many to question whether a U.N. process will ever produce an agreement to seriously slash greenhouse-gas emissions. The process's guarantee that all nations will have a say led the talks to bog down for more than 10 days of procedural wrangling and mutual distrust before their heads of government swooped in late last week and hammered out the 2 1/2-page statement of resolve.

The U.N. climate process will tumble now into a series of future meetings. U.N. Secretary General Ban ki-Moon and many other negotiators said Saturday they hoped to hash out the specifics by the next big annual U.N. climate summit, scheduled for late next year in Mexico.

'Ideally speaking, we should have a legally binding treaty,' said Mr. Ban, noting that he had slept two hours in two days and hadn't eaten a meal since Friday lunch. 'This kind of negotiation process is very complex.'

　For industries that would be affected by binding limits on carbon-dioxide emissions -- steelmakers, power generators, oil companies and chemical manufacturers among many -- the non-binding Copenhagen Accord failed to provide the regulatory certainty that could unleash private investment in lower-carbon technologies, from more-efficient coal-fired power-plant machinery to electric cars to solar panels.

'Business is seeking predictability to help plan its future global investments,' Laurent Corbier, chairman of the International Chamber of Commerce's energy-and-environment commission, said in a statement over the weekend.

　Because the Copenhagen statement isn't binding, it needn't form the basis of any future negotiations.

　'It's not a treaty,' one Chinese negotiator reminded his colleagues as the official session was winding up Saturday, following agreement on the Copenhagen Accord. 'It's not going to be signed or agreed to.'

Mr. Ban noted that the pact gives countries until Jan. 31 to voluntarily list, in an annex to the accord, voluntary pledges to curb their emissions.Major economies -- including the U.S., China, the European Union and Brazil -- made such pledges in the lead-up to Copenhagen. Those pledges fall short of the severe cuts that many scientists, and some governments, have said are necessary by midcentury to avoid potentially dangerous consequences from climate change.