英语 英语 日语 日语 韩语 韩语 法语 法语 德语 德语 西班牙语 西班牙语 意大利语 意大利语 阿拉伯语 阿拉伯语 葡萄牙语 葡萄牙语 越南语 越南语 俄语 俄语 芬兰语 芬兰语 泰语 泰语 泰语 丹麦语 泰语 对外汉语

美国国家公共电台 NPR 'Losing Earth' Explores How Oil Industry Played Politics With The Planet's Fate

时间:2019-04-11 05:30来源:互联网 提供网友:nan   字体: [ ]
特别声明:本栏目内容均从网络收集或者网友提供,供仅参考试用,我们无法保证内容完整和正确。如果资料损害了您的权益,请与站长联系,我们将及时删除并致以歉意。
    (单词翻译:双击或拖选)

 

TERRY GROSS, HOST:

This is FRESH AIR. I'm Terry Gross. As we deal with more extreme weather around the world and hear more dire1 reports about the future impact of climate change, you have to wonder, why didn't we succeed in taking preventive measures sooner, before things had progressed? That's one of the key questions my guest Nathaniel Rich tries to answer in his new book, "Losing Earth: A Recent History." It's an expanded version of his report that the New York Times magazine devoted2 an entire issue to last August.

He focuses on the period from 1979 to '89, a period he describes as a time before the fossil fuel industry funded scientists to create doubt about the science of climate change and before the Republican Party adopted climate denialism as a central tenet. He focuses on the scientists, activists4 and political leaders who pushed for measures to limit carbon emissions6 and the political and corporate7 leaders who blocked them. We're also going to talk about where we are now with a president who doubts the science and a growing movement of young people insisting on action reversing the path we're on.

Nathaniel Rich, welcome to FRESH AIR. How much worse has the climate change problem gotten since your book ends in 1989?

NATHANIEL RICH: More carbon dioxide has been emitted into the atmosphere since the final page of the book basically, since the end of 1989, than in the history of civilization preceding it. So it's gotten a lot worse. Obviously, the political situation's gotten a lot worse as well. It's become a starkly8 partisan9 issue. I don't have to tell anyone that. And it seems like we are much further from a solution than we were 30 years ago.

GROSS: You write that, now, a long-term disaster is the best-case scenario10. Would you explain that?

RICH: Yeah. Well, a certain amount of warming is baked in. And that's, you know, referring to some of the projections11 about 1 1/2 or 2 degrees Celsius12 warming above historical means, and there's all kinds of horrific scenarios13 that come with that. Of course, that's not nearly as bad as, you know, 3 degrees or 4 degrees or 5 degrees warming. But even when we talk about it in those terms, in sort of half degrees or full degrees warming, it's almost euphemistic because there's there's such dramatic differences even between, you know, 2 degrees and 2.1 degrees, 2.1 degrees and 2.2 degrees.

And I think one of the lies, sort of convenient dishonesties we have about the issue, one of the more benign14 ones, I guess, is that we think of it almost, like, in Hollywood terms, like, either we're going to win this thing, or we're going to suffer a crushing defeat. But of course, there's a huge range of outcomes in between. And at this point - yeah - where we're at, ranging from the not very good to the apocalyptic15, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to better our situation as much as possible.

GROSS: Is there a moment when you think we came really close to seriously cutting back on the carbon emissions that are responsible for climate change during the period that you write about, '79 to '89?

RICH: Absolutely. From from '79 to '89, there are a series of efforts, escalating16 efforts, to first bring the issue to the attention of the powers that be, people at the highest levels of the federal government, and then to bring it to the public to generate public concern. And finally, in the middle of the decade, a solution materializes, which is a global treaty to reduce emissions that would be binding17. And it's modeled after the ozone18 treaty that's then in process.

And by the end of the decade, we've reached the point of high-level diplomatic meetings to negotiate this binding global treaty. And we get to the precipice19 of an agreement on the framework of this treaty. And at the very last second, the U.S. pulls out, the story I tell in the book.

And so I think that, at least on paper, that's the closest we've come. I think you could have a reasonable, you know, debate about whether or not, if the U.S. did sign the treaty, they would have lived up - we would've lived up to the terms of it, whether other countries would have lived up to the terms of it even if it was binding. And that's a more, you know, complicated conversation to have. I think, at the very least, we'd be a lot further ahead than we are now. That seems indisputable.

GROSS: So what year did the U.S. pull out of this treaty? Who is the president, and why did we pull out?

RICH: So it's 1989. President is George H.W. Bush. And the previous summer, James Hansen, a NASA scientist who had become essentially20 the face of climate science, gave testimony21 before Congress in which he said, global warming is here. It's no longer a theory. We're seeing evidence of warming in global temperatures. It was the hottest summer in American history at the time.

And the story became a - it became a major public national story and to the point that even George Bush on the campaign stump22 gave speeches about it, was making promises that, as president, he would solve the problem then called the greenhouse effect as well. And he said, you know, those who think we can't solve the greenhouse effect haven't heard about the White House effect. And when I'm in the White House, you know, we'll solve it. And he gets to the White House.

James Baker23, who's the new secretary of state, in his first major speech at the State Department, he invites the IPCC, the international organization under the auspices24 of the United Nations that's drafting - begins drafting a treaty. They have one of their first meetings at the State Department. And he endorses25 this program. And over the course of the year, you get to a meeting in Noordwijk in the Netherlands, a kind of coastal26 town on the North Sea.

That's the first high-level diplomatic meeting of - it's of environmental ministers from all over the world. Sixty-five countries or so come there. And there's a general sense that everyone's going to sign essentially a letter of intent that they will pursue a binding treaty to reduce global emissions. And at that meeting, the U.S. pulls out.

And the reason, at least the narrow political reason for that, is that over the course of that year, there had been a huge fight within the administration between William Riley, the head of Bush's EPA, and John Sununu, his chief of staff. And Sununu was highly skeptical28 of the science and suspicious of the motives29 of this treaty. And he was ultimately more powerful and won the argument, essentially, and was able to force the U.S. delegation30 to not accept anything that was binding. And at that point, the treaty became watered down.

GROSS: Do you think that some of these treaties are almost like masquerades where countries show up, and they look really great - like, we're going to do it - we're going to sign it - and then, at the last minute, you pull out? Like, it's almost like a game of chicken. Like, nobody really wants to do it, but everybody's waiting for somebody else to pull out - that no one really has the political will to make the sacrifices that need to be made.

RICH: Yeah. That's John Sununu's argument, basically. I spoke32 to him at length for the book. And he said, listen - I mean, he's totally unapologetic about his role in this. And I said, you know, do you claim responsibility for thwarting33 (laughter) any chance of a solution on this? And he said, I - essentially, he said, I wish I could. But in fact, I felt that we were the only honest brokers34 at the table and that the other countries weren't serious - that even though it was, you know, a quote, "binding agreement," essentially, what - you know, what's the country going to do if someone doesn't hit their targets? Are they going to bomb them? You know, are they going to have economic sanctions? I mean, of course not.

And in fact, the leader of the delegation, Allan Bromley, who was Bush's science adviser35 and was kind of Sununu's man in Noordwijk - he wrote a memoir36 in which he essentially said the same thing, that he said that - in conversations with other delegates, other environmental ministers - at Noordwijk, he asked them, you know, how are you going to hit these targets? Do you have plans, you know, to reduce emissions by 20 percent or whatever by a certain year? And they would say - a couple of them told him, well, no, but it's just a piece of paper. And, you know, no one's going to send us to jail.

And so I think, yes, it's - I think you have to take seriously that kind of cynical37 view. And I think you can't really take seriously Sununu's scientific opinions on this matter. But I think you can take seriously his skepticism about the power of these treaties.

GROSS: Let me reintroduce you here. If you're just joining us, my guest is Nathaniel Rich. He's the author of the new book, "Losing Earth: A Recent History." We're going to take a short break here, and then we'll talk some more about climate change and why we haven't made more progress than we have. We'll be right back. This is FRESH AIR.

(SOUNDBITE OF STEFANO BOLLANI, ET AL'S "ALOBAR E KUDRA")

GROSS: This is FRESH AIR. Let's get back to my interview with Nathaniel Rich, author of the new book "Losing Earth: A Recent History." It's about climate change and why we failed to solve the problem when we had the chance. The book focuses on 1979 to '89, looking at the scientists, politicians and the oil industry, the people who were leading the efforts to change and the people who were blocking them.

You said in an interview that you spent an enormous amount of time researching the oil industry and their efforts in blocking the efforts to curb38 carbon emissions. And you also said that it actually plays a very little part in your book. (Laughter) You didn't use much of your research. So why is that?

RICH: The industry has been following this issue for a long time. You know, there are studies from Exxon or even Humble39 Oil - the predecessor40 to Exxon - going back into the mid-1950s. And even then, those studies were not about whether or not this was happening. It was really - the question was, how much of the added CO2 in the atmosphere was because of Exxon, basically, because of the fossil fuel industry? And they continued to monitor this over the decades. There were, you know, occasional sort of CO2 working groups, study groups. This was going on, also, at the American Petroleum41 Institute - the big trade group for the oil and gas industry - and at some of the other companies.

And those efforts continued through the '80s. But it was never - during that decade - obviously, things have changed quite dramatically - but during that decade, it was never a high priority. And I spoke with a lot of people who worked in the industry during that time and people at the highest levels of API. And they really weren't concerned about it, in part because there was no serious efforts in D.C. to pass, you know, laws or policies to reduce emissions.

And it wasn't really until Hansen - James Hansen, the NASA scientist - spoke before Congress in '88 and generated a huge - sort of huge national headlines that they started to worry. And the story of how they began to mobilize this multidecadal effort to sow propaganda, disinformation, to buy off politicians and scientists and, ultimately, to convert an entire political party to denialism is - the seeds of that you see emerging in the weeks and months after the Hansen hearing. But before that, it was really on the back burner.

GROSS: So let's talk about how the oil industry's lobbying efforts changed at the end of the '80s, where your book ends. You write about how the American Petroleum Institute started funding a lobbying group. They formed the lobbying organization the Global Climate Coalition42. And what did this lobbying group do to mobilize public opinion to be skeptical of climate science?

RICH: Yeah, it's sort of a remarkable43 turn of events in that after Hansen's hearing, there are these high-level conversations at the American Petroleum Institute and at Exxon about, essentially, what do we do about this? It seems clear that regulation is coming. You know, George Bush is talking about it, and so on.

And they essentially reached the same conclusions. They - Exxon and API - they say, we need to be an active participant in any kind of policy discussion. We need to burnish44 our credentials45 as, you know, scientific experts on the subject, so we have credibility in it. We need to make sure that the science - that the policy doesn't extend beyond what the science says. Emphasize uncertainty46 where it exists. That would become, you know, crucial later on. And then, perhaps most important, don't accept any policy that will hurt the bottom line. That's the beginning of it.

And then, as almost an afterthought at the time, API, through its press office, which is coordinating47 the press for this industry group Global Climate Coalition, starts to reach out to a couple of scientists who are friendly with the industry who have expressed some doubt about either the ozone or CO2. And they start encouraging them to speak to the press. Sometimes that encouragement takes the form of payouts. The head of the API program told me they gave $2,000 to a scientist whenever he wrote an op-ed for a national publication. And that is almost an afterthought at the time. It's pretty low on the totem pole of what they're doing. They're also meeting with congressmen and so on.

But it pays enormous dividends48 because all of a sudden, national news publications start quoting these scientists - and it's really a handful of people, four or five people - over and over again. And an issue that to this point has been a story about, you know, fear of what's going to happen, all of a sudden has two sides. And of course, that's like catnip, (laughter), for journalists. And all of a sudden, you have a number of pieces that start to appear that say maybe there's not scientific consensus49 about this problem.

GROSS: Right. But generating controversy50 around climate change, where, it sounds like before, it wasn't - there weren't people denying it. There were people saying - based on your research, there were people saying, well, we don't really know for sure how bad things are going to be. Do we really want to risk the economy over science that's not kind of nailed down yet? We don't know what the consequences will be or when they'll be, exactly, so let's kind of keep the status quo as long as we can.

So it goes from that to, like, the whole notion of climate change is controversial. There's two sides. So is that, like, one of the innovations of the late '80s, making it, like, controversial with two sides and one of the sides saying this science really might not be true at all?

RICH: Yeah. Exactly. And it starts almost tentatively. It starts with saying, well, it's not as certain as we think, as people say, as James Hansen says it is. There's problems with the climate models, the computer models that, you know, Hansen uses. And then it goes into, we really don't know what, you know, the regional effects will be. And it grows and grows. It's almost like they're encouraged by their success, and they become more and more brazen51. And then ultimately, you get, after a number of years, into the '90s, you get into this bizarro universe where, all of a sudden, they're questioning the basic fundamental science itself. And of course, that science goes back not to just 1979 but to the late 19th century about, you know, what's the effect of pumping a bunch of CO2 into the atmosphere and what warming will that cause?

And so it's - we've entered this weird52 funhouse realm where now, if you jump ahead to the present day, you have a political party, the only major political party in the world, that endorses a position that's essentially to the right, even, of what the industry now says in their public statements. You know, Exxon publicly today doesn't deny climate change, but you have a party that does. And so it's - I think it's something that future historians will spend a lot of time piecing out, is how this sort of little lie grew into a big lie and overwhelmed our politics.

GROSS: Do you think it's fair to say that the fossil fuel industry invented the idea of climate denial?

RICH: Yeah. I think that's fair to say.

GROSS: OK. This is interesting. You say that the industry, the fossil fuel industry, saw an upside to the warming trends of climate change. What was the upside for them?

RICH: Well, there are a few. I mean, drilling in the Arctic is one of them, which you see starting to happen now.

GROSS: Drilling in the Arctic because of the permafrost melting?

RICH: Yeah because - yeah, the ice melting (laughter). And so that opens up shipping53 passages, and you can get to more oil. And of course, they were studying that back in the '80s, as well, you know, licking their chops (laughter). And but also, one of the early findings from API was that in a warmer world, you'd need more energy. Essentially, more air conditioning. And that would, you know, further industry profits.

GROSS: My guest is Nathaniel Rich, author of the new book "Losing Earth: A Recent History." We'll talk more about climate change, and what stood in the way of taking action to stop or slow it and how young activists today are redefining the issue after we take a short break. We'll also hear Ken31 Tucker's review of Billie Eilish's debut54 album. I'm Terry Gross, and this is FRESH AIR.

GROSS: This is FRESH AIR. I'm Terry Gross. Let's get back to my interview with Nathaniel Rich, author of the new book "Losing Earth: A Recent History." It's about climate change and why we didn't take action sooner to stop or at least slow it. Rich examines the period from 1979 to 1989, a period he describes as a time before the fossil fuel industry funded scientists to create doubt about the science of climate change and before the Republican Party adopted climate denialism as a central tenet. He focuses on the scientists, activists and political leaders who pushed for measures to limit carbon emissions and the political and corporate leaders who blocked them.

So we were just talking about the oil industry's role in obstructing55 movement forward on stopping climate change. Politicians played a strong role in this, too. One of the centerpieces of your book is the NASA scientist James Hansen testifying before Congress about carbon emissions, climate change and what we're in store for if we don't move forward. And his testimony - you can say it was suppressed. You could say it was censored57. I don't know what word you want to use. But the H.W. Bush administration tried to stop him from saying what he planned on saying. Tell us who tried to do it and how.

RICH: Yeah, this is something that had not been known. And one of the things I most wanted to figure out was that after Hansen testifies in 1988 - of course, and he's been testifying all decade - but in '88 he gets this huge amount of attention - and in 1989, he's due to go back. And this is right as negotiations58 are really getting started on a global treaty. And John Sununu is fighting this.

And his testimony comes back not only with deletions but also with absurd, new language, essentially to the effect that no regulatory policy should be introduced if it at all forces the U.S. to suffer economically - of course, nothing a scientist would say in any context. And he's outraged59, understandably. And he takes this testimony to Al Gore60, who's then a senator and leading the hearing. And Gore calls The New York Times. And they run a huge story about it. And it becomes a major scandal. And in fact, it generates more support for climate policy than Hansen could have done by himself.

And it had been unknown, you know, who was responsible for that? At the time, the White House claimed it was some bureaucrat61 five levels down from the top. I asked John Sununu if he knew anything about it. And he said, yeah, I did (laughter). I was responsible for it - that he told Richard Darman, the head of the OMB at the time, to censor56 it. He didn't think that Hansen's claims had merit. And he tried to stop it.

GROSS: How much of a scientist was John Sununu?

RICH: He considered himself a scientist. He considered himself...

GROSS: On what grounds? (Laughter).

RICH: ...An old engineer. I mean, on fairly legitimate62 grounds. He got a Ph.D. in - I believe in fluid engineering. And he had taught. And he even taught a - he taught at MIT. He even taught a class about science and public policy. And so he still - he fashioned himself, you know, an expert and smarter than any of the scientists whose work he was reviewing. And he - because he had done some computer modeling, although of a very different sort, as a Ph.D. student, he felt that that gave him the authority to say that Hansen's computer modeling about climate - extremely sophisticated computer programs that he was running - were inaccurate63 and bad. And that was sort of the foundation of his argument of why, you know, this climate science stuff was made up.

GROSS: So let's jump to where we are today. Let's start with President Trump64 and his administration. Do you consider President Trump a climate skeptic27 or a climate denier?

(LAUGHTER)

RICH: It almost seems to sort of confer too much dignity to give him either of those terms. I mean, a denier. He's certainly a denier. But you know, that's almost like - we're engaging now in a kind of fantasy realm that it is - to say, even, that he's a denier suggests that he's actually - sort of thinks about it and has weighed the science. And I don't think that's what we're really talking about when it comes to the president.

GROSS: But there are people in his administration, I think, who are pretty hardcore skeptics or deniers. Who are some of those people?

RICH: Oh, gee65. Yeah. Well, I mean, Scott Pruitt, now deposed66; Ryan Zinke, now deposed, basically - Andrew Wheeler. So the - you know, Pruitt, head of EPA, replaced by Wheeler; Zinke, the interior. Myron Ebell's sort of an old denier who's within the administration. Just about every person, I think - Rick Perry, head of energy. It's the whole party.

I mean, you - I don't think - it's hard today, at least at the national level, to be a viable67 candidate on the right and accept scientific consensus on climate change. It's endemic. And it's - at this point, I think it's constitutional. It's a central tenet of Republicanism.

GROSS: So one of President Trump's first actions was to pull the United States out of the Paris Agreement on climate change. What are some of his other - what are some of the other things he's done to block any momentum68 forward on stopping - on limiting carbon emissions?

RICH: Oh, trying to roll back just about every, you know, policy that President Obama introduced, trying to roll back clean air standards, emissions from coal factories, mileage69 standards - CAFE standards, they're called - you name it, all-out assault. And not just on climate but on any kind of environmental protection, I should say. And you know, I guess the only silver lining70 is that something like the Paris accord, it's - you know, he can withdraw, but the formal withdrawal71 doesn't happen for a couple of years, and even then the treaty is voluntary to begin with, so it's more of a political statement than anything else. But rolling back emission5 standards is probably at the top of the list of the bad things that are going on.

But I think more destructive is just this peddling72 of this kind of - this fantasy, and essentially - I mean, it's connected to a lot of other stuff you see in the administration, a basic affront73 on objective reality, and you see that extends beyond the climate conversation and into, you know, the conversation we're having about news and reporting and historical fact and all the rest.

GROSS: Let me reintroduce you. If you're just joining us, my guest is Nathaniel Rich, and his new book is called "Losing Earth: A Recent History." We'll talk more about climate change after a break. This is FRESH AIR.

(SOUNDBITE OF GERALD CLAYTON'S "ENVISIONINGS")

GROSS: This is FRESH AIR. And if you're just joining us, my guest is Nathaniel Rich, author of the new book, "Losing Earth: A Recent History." It's about climate change and why we failed to solve the problem when we maybe had the chance. The book focuses on 1979 to '89, looking at the scientists, the politicians and the fossil fuel industry, looking at the people leading the efforts to change and the people blocking those efforts.

One of the things I know you've thought about a lot is what is the best way to motivate change at the political level and also just at the behavioral level, but - what we do in our daily lives? Is it through terrifying people with apocalyptic scenarios? Like, what is the best way to motivate change? What are some of your thoughts about that?

RICH: Yeah, this has been a big debate, particularly within the activist3 community, for a while now about - you know, it's essentially a marketing74 question; how do we get people to care about this problem and prioritize it? And is fear the best approach? Is hope and, you know, inspiring people? I think that the trend has been towards the latter more. I feel like...

GROSS: Toward hope?

RICH: Towards hope, you know, that people need positive stories...

GROSS: But one of books on the bestseller list now is a book by David Wallace-Wells who spells out really terrifying scenarios about what will happen if we don't, you know, seriously limit carbon emissions. And I think people are very interested in that book, judging by its place on the bestseller list.

RICH: Yeah, I think David's made a really valuable contribution there, and it's an honest book. But I think this whole conversation between, you know, hope or despair is itself a kind of - sort of an entry-level engagement with the issue, and I think it's a particularly an American phenomenon. I don't think, you know, the Germans are maybe particularly optimistic or Scandinavians. You know, some of these countries that are way ahead of us in terms of climate policy, I don't think they force-feed hope to their citizens to get them to care about the issue.

And I feel like we're adults here (laughter), and we should be able to talk about both the worst-case scenarios and some, you know, optimistic, hopeful things that are going on and talk about the complexity75 of the issue and, you know, talk about not only our hopes for the future but our failures to this point and our democracy's failures to this point. And there's no - to reduce it down to hope versus76 fear itself seems to me kind of a form of dishonesty, and I think - you know, I'm all for activists figuring out the best way to motivate people to vote, but I think there's more to the story than that, and that's what I've tried to write about.

GROSS: Do you think the hope versus despair motivational debate has to do with the fact that forward momentum has been blocked from so many directions - from the industry, from climate deniers, from, you know, politicians - and so the obstacles to moving forward are so great that something very motivational has to be done to counteract77 that through hope or despair?

RICH: Yeah, I think there's a huge amount of bitterness and frustration78 among people who care about this issue, you know.

GROSS: Because - I just want to say, to elaborate on what I was saying, that the countries that - other countries you mentioned, they don't have climate deniers...

RICH: Right.

GROSS: ...Who are saying, hey, this isn't even a thing; this is just, like, fake science.

RICH: Yeah, and that's true. And I think what's interesting now about the way the conversation has turned in recent months - I mean, really since the midterms - is you have this major youth movement emerging. You see it in talk of a Green New Deal; Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's, you know, speeches about it; you see it coming from the students in the Sunrise Movement when they sat in in Nancy Pelosi's office after the election to demand climate action; you see it in these student walkouts; Greta Thunberg, a 16-year-old Swedish girl who's been leading and has become a global phenomenon.

Those students, those people, those young people and the young leaders are no longer, you know, worried about, you know, engaging into this denialist thing; they're making a different kind of argument. They're saying that failure to act is harming us, is killing79 us, that you, you know, elders who are failing to act are stealing our future away from us. And that inaction at this point is not only stupid, which is what sort of activists have been saying forever, but is wrong, is morally wrong, and it undermines the very basis of our society. And I think that's a more powerful argument, and I frankly80 think politically that's a more powerful argument as well. I think it's also a more honest argument. They are appealing to a moral high ground. And I think that's enormously powerful.

GROSS: And making it a life-and-death issue.

Would you describe what you think the major takeaways are from the Green New Deal that was proposed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ed Markey?

RICH: Yeah. Well, you know, it's a statement of principles primarily. It's not a law. It's not a bill. In some ways, it's - in some of the particulars, it's less ambitious than bills that were proposed and introduced into Congress at the end of the '80s by both Republicans and Democrats81. But I think what distinguishes it and what makes it a truly transformational document is that it identifies the climate crisis as connected to every form, essentially, of social injustice82 that we have. And I think that's the only honest way of looking at it.

You know, climate change victimizes the victimized. You know, it oppresses the oppressed. So the worse off you are - the more marginalized you are, the worse you're going to suffer from what's coming. And so it's extremely valuable in that it says that, you know, climate change is not just one item on this sort of menu of political items, but it's the one that encompasses83 them all and that there's no such thing as - you know, you can't have social justice if there's not climate justice. You can't have a civil society if - a stable society if you don't have a stable climate.

And I think that's a profound argument and an honest one. It puts it into moral terms in a way that is new in Washington. And I think that is enormously valuable. You know, you can get into the debate about how best to achieve certain goals, and those are important policy debates to have. But it's reframed the issue dramatically and, I think, critically.

GROSS: OK. So you're 39. What are the things you're most concerned about seeing in terms of climate change in your lifetime and in your children's lifetime?

RICH: I think the most immediate84 way that we will feel this, as members of one of the wealthiest countries in the world, is the effect on geopolitical instability. When you have huge stresses on people, particularly in the developing world, who can no longer live the place they've been living, they have to leave. And I think you'd see...

GROSS: Because of drought or floods.

RICH: So drought - yeah, drought or flood. So I think the projections have it that there'll be enormous spikes85 in, you know, migration86 all over the world. It's already started, of course. But it will only become more intense.

And when you have huge masses of people moving from, you know, like, one country to another, one region to another, it introduces enormous amounts of stress. And essentially, what we're talking about is - war is the ultimate outcome there. And so the fear then becomes of some kind of major global war that's sparked by stresses from climate change.

GROSS: Nathaniel Rich, thank you so much for talking with us.

RICH: Thanks for having me.

GROSS: Nathaniel Rich is the author of the new book "Losing Earth: A Recent History."

After we take a short break, rock critic Ken Tucker will review the new album by the 17-year-old singer Billie Eilish. I'm Terry Gross, and this is FRESH AIR.

(SOUNDBITE OF JAMES HUNTER'S "I'LL WALK AWAY")


点击收听单词发音收听单词发音  

1 dire llUz9     
adj.可怕的,悲惨的,阴惨的,极端的
参考例句:
  • There were dire warnings about the dangers of watching too much TV.曾经有人就看电视太多的危害性提出严重警告。
  • We were indeed in dire straits.But we pulled through.那时我们的困难真是大极了,但是我们渡过了困难。
2 devoted xu9zka     
adj.忠诚的,忠实的,热心的,献身于...的
参考例句:
  • He devoted his life to the educational cause of the motherland.他为祖国的教育事业贡献了一生。
  • We devoted a lengthy and full discussion to this topic.我们对这个题目进行了长时间的充分讨论。
3 activist gyAzO     
n.活动分子,积极分子
参考例句:
  • He's been a trade union activist for many years.多年来他一直是工会的积极分子。
  • He is a social activist in our factory.他是我厂的社会活动积极分子。
4 activists 90fd83cc3f53a40df93866d9c91bcca4     
n.(政治活动的)积极分子,活动家( activist的名词复数 )
参考例句:
  • His research work was attacked by animal rights activists . 他的研究受到了动物权益维护者的抨击。
  • Party activists with lower middle class pedigrees are numerous. 党的激进分子中有很多出身于中产阶级下层。 来自《简明英汉词典》
5 emission vjnz4     
n.发出物,散发物;发出,散发
参考例句:
  • Rigorous measures will be taken to reduce the total pollutant emission.采取严格有力措施,降低污染物排放总量。
  • Finally,the way to effectively control particulate emission is pointed out.最后,指出有效降低颗粒排放的方向。
6 emissions 1a87f8769eb755734e056efecb5e2da9     
排放物( emission的名词复数 ); 散发物(尤指气体)
参考例句:
  • Most scientists accept that climate change is linked to carbon emissions. 大多数科学家都相信气候变化与排放的含碳气体有关。
  • Dangerous emissions radiate from plutonium. 危险的辐射物从钚放散出来。
7 corporate 7olzl     
adj.共同的,全体的;公司的,企业的
参考例句:
  • This is our corporate responsibility.这是我们共同的责任。
  • His corporate's life will be as short as a rabbit's tail.他的公司的寿命是兔子尾巴长不了。
8 starkly 4e0b2db3ce8605be1f8d536fac698e3f     
adj. 变硬了的,完全的 adv. 完全,实在,简直
参考例句:
  • The city of Befast remains starkly divided between Catholics and Protestants. 贝尔法斯特市完全被处在天主教徒和新教徒的纷争之中。
  • The black rocks stood out starkly against the sky. 那些黑色的岩石在天空衬托下十分显眼。
9 partisan w4ZzY     
adj.党派性的;游击队的;n.游击队员;党徒
参考例句:
  • In their anger they forget all the partisan quarrels.愤怒之中,他们忘掉一切党派之争。
  • The numerous newly created partisan detachments began working slowly towards that region.许多新建的游击队都开始慢慢地向那里移动。
10 scenario lZoxm     
n.剧本,脚本;概要
参考例句:
  • But the birth scenario is not completely accurate.然而分娩脚本并非完全准确的。
  • This is a totally different scenario.这是完全不同的剧本。
11 projections 7275a1e8ba6325ecfc03ebb61a4b9192     
预测( projection的名词复数 ); 投影; 投掷; 突起物
参考例句:
  • Their sales projections are a total thumbsuck. 他们的销售量预测纯属估计。
  • The council has revised its projections of funding requirements upwards. 地方议会调高了对资金需求的预测。
12 Celsius AXRzl     
adj.摄氏温度计的,摄氏的
参考例句:
  • The temperature tonight will fall to seven degrees Celsius.今晚气温将下降到七摄氏度。
  • The maximum temperature in July may be 36 degrees Celsius.七月份最高温度可能达到36摄氏度。
13 scenarios f7c7eeee199dc0ef47fe322cc223be88     
n.[意]情节;剧本;事态;脚本
参考例句:
  • Further, graphite cores may be safer than non-graphite cores under some accident scenarios. 再者,根据一些事故解说,石墨堆芯可比非石墨堆芯更安全一些。 来自英汉非文学 - 环境法 - 环境法
  • Again, scenarios should make it clear which modes are acceptable to users in various contexts. 同样,我们可以运用场景剧本来搞清楚在不同情境下哪些模式可被用户接受。 来自About Face 3交互设计精髓
14 benign 2t2zw     
adj.善良的,慈祥的;良性的,无危险的
参考例句:
  • The benign weather brought North America a bumper crop.温和的气候给北美带来大丰收。
  • Martha is a benign old lady.玛莎是个仁慈的老妇人。
15 apocalyptic dVJzK     
adj.预示灾祸的,启示的
参考例句:
  • The air is chill and stagnant,the language apocalyptic.空气寒冷而污浊,语言则是《启示录》式的。
  • Parts of the ocean there look just absolutely apocalyptic.海洋的很多区域看上去完全像是世界末日。
16 escalating 1b4e810e65548c7656e9ea468e403ca1     
v.(使)逐步升级( escalate的现在分词 );(使)逐步扩大;(使)更高;(使)更大
参考例句:
  • The cost of living is escalating. 生活费用在迅速上涨。 来自《简明英汉词典》
  • The cost of living is escalating in the country. 这个国家的生活费用在上涨。 来自辞典例句
17 binding 2yEzWb     
有约束力的,有效的,应遵守的
参考例句:
  • The contract was not signed and has no binding force. 合同没有签署因而没有约束力。
  • Both sides have agreed that the arbitration will be binding. 双方都赞同仲裁具有约束力。
18 ozone omQzBE     
n.臭氧,新鲜空气
参考例句:
  • The ozone layer is a protective layer around the planet Earth.臭氧层是地球的保护层。
  • The capacity of ozone can adjust according of requirement.臭氧的产量可根据需要或调节。
19 precipice NuNyW     
n.悬崖,危急的处境
参考例句:
  • The hut hung half over the edge of the precipice.那间小屋有一半悬在峭壁边上。
  • A slight carelessness on this precipice could cost a man his life.在这悬崖上稍一疏忽就会使人丧生。
20 essentially nntxw     
adv.本质上,实质上,基本上
参考例句:
  • Really great men are essentially modest.真正的伟人大都很谦虚。
  • She is an essentially selfish person.她本质上是个自私自利的人。
21 testimony zpbwO     
n.证词;见证,证明
参考例句:
  • The testimony given by him is dubious.他所作的证据是可疑的。
  • He was called in to bear testimony to what the police officer said.他被传入为警官所说的话作证。
22 stump hGbzY     
n.残株,烟蒂,讲演台;v.砍断,蹒跚而走
参考例句:
  • He went on the stump in his home state.他到故乡所在的州去发表演说。
  • He used the stump as a table.他把树桩用作桌子。
23 baker wyTz62     
n.面包师
参考例句:
  • The baker bakes his bread in the bakery.面包师在面包房内烤面包。
  • The baker frosted the cake with a mixture of sugar and whites of eggs.面包师在蛋糕上撒了一层白糖和蛋清的混合料。
24 auspices do0yG     
n.资助,赞助
参考例句:
  • The association is under the auspices of Word Bank.这个组织是在世界银行的赞助下办的。
  • The examination was held under the auspices of the government.这次考试是由政府主办的。
25 endorses c3e60c44ba7aa93f0218a4cb8797284f     
v.赞同( endorse的第三人称单数 );在(尤指支票的)背面签字;在(文件的)背面写评论;在广告上说本人使用并赞同某产品
参考例句:
  • There isn't one country in the Middle East that now endorses the Eisenhower Doctrine. 但至今没有一个中东国家认可它。 来自辞典例句
  • Whether any of this truly endorses Dr Patel's hypothesis is moot. 这些视频能否真正证明帕特的假设成立还是个未知数。 来自互联网
26 coastal WWiyh     
adj.海岸的,沿海的,沿岸的
参考例句:
  • The ocean waves are slowly eating away the coastal rocks.大海的波浪慢慢地侵蚀着岸边的岩石。
  • This country will fortify the coastal areas.该国将加强沿海地区的防御。
27 skeptic hxlwn     
n.怀疑者,怀疑论者,无神论者
参考例句:
  • She is a skeptic about the dangers of global warming.她是全球变暖危险的怀疑论者。
  • How am I going to convince this skeptic that she should attention to my research?我将如何使怀疑论者确信她应该关注我的研究呢?
28 skeptical MxHwn     
adj.怀疑的,多疑的
参考例句:
  • Others here are more skeptical about the chances for justice being done.这里的其他人更为怀疑正义能否得到伸张。
  • Her look was skeptical and resigned.她的表情是将信将疑而又无可奈何。
29 motives 6c25d038886898b20441190abe240957     
n.动机,目的( motive的名词复数 )
参考例句:
  • to impeach sb's motives 怀疑某人的动机
  • His motives are unclear. 他的用意不明。
30 delegation NxvxQ     
n.代表团;派遣
参考例句:
  • The statement of our delegation was singularly appropriate to the occasion.我们代表团的声明非常适合时宜。
  • We shall inform you of the date of the delegation's arrival.我们将把代表团到达的日期通知你。
31 ken k3WxV     
n.视野,知识领域
参考例句:
  • Such things are beyond my ken.我可不懂这些事。
  • Abstract words are beyond the ken of children.抽象的言辞超出小孩所理解的范围.
32 spoke XryyC     
n.(车轮的)辐条;轮辐;破坏某人的计划;阻挠某人的行动 v.讲,谈(speak的过去式);说;演说;从某种观点来说
参考例句:
  • They sourced the spoke nuts from our company.他们的轮辐螺帽是从我们公司获得的。
  • The spokes of a wheel are the bars that connect the outer ring to the centre.辐条是轮子上连接外圈与中心的条棒。
33 thwarting 501b8e18038a151c47b85191c8326942     
阻挠( thwart的现在分词 ); 使受挫折; 挫败; 横过
参考例句:
  • The republicans are trying to embarrass the president by thwarting his economic program. 共和党人企图通过阻挠总统的经济计划使其难堪。
  • There were too many men resisting his authority thwarting him. 下边对他这个长官心怀不服的,故意作对的,可多着哩。
34 brokers 75d889d756f7fbea24ad402e01a65b20     
n.(股票、外币等)经纪人( broker的名词复数 );中间人;代理商;(订合同的)中人v.做掮客(或中人等)( broker的第三人称单数 );作为权力经纪人进行谈判;以中间人等身份安排…
参考例句:
  • The firm in question was Alsbery & Co., whiskey brokers. 那家公司叫阿尔斯伯里公司,经销威士忌。 来自英汉文学 - 嘉莉妹妹
  • From time to time a telephone would ring in the brokers' offices. 那两排经纪人房间里不时响着叮令的电话。 来自子夜部分
35 adviser HznziU     
n.劝告者,顾问
参考例句:
  • They employed me as an adviser.他们聘请我当顾问。
  • Our department has engaged a foreign teacher as phonetic adviser.我们系已经聘请了一位外籍老师作为语音顾问。
36 memoir O7Hz7     
n.[pl.]回忆录,自传;记事录
参考例句:
  • He has just published a memoir in honour of his captain.他刚刚出了一本传记来纪念他的队长。
  • In her memoir,the actress wrote about the bittersweet memories of her first love.在那个女演员的自传中,她写到了自己苦乐掺半的初恋。
37 cynical Dnbz9     
adj.(对人性或动机)怀疑的,不信世道向善的
参考例句:
  • The enormous difficulty makes him cynical about the feasibility of the idea.由于困难很大,他对这个主意是否可行持怀疑态度。
  • He was cynical that any good could come of democracy.他不相信民主会带来什么好处。
38 curb LmRyy     
n.场外证券市场,场外交易;vt.制止,抑制
参考例句:
  • I could not curb my anger.我按捺不住我的愤怒。
  • You must curb your daughter when you are in church.你在教堂时必须管住你的女儿。
39 humble ddjzU     
adj.谦卑的,恭顺的;地位低下的;v.降低,贬低
参考例句:
  • In my humble opinion,he will win the election.依我拙见,他将在选举中获胜。
  • Defeat and failure make people humble.挫折与失败会使人谦卑。
40 predecessor qP9x0     
n.前辈,前任
参考例句:
  • It will share the fate of its predecessor.它将遭受与前者同样的命运。
  • The new ambassador is more mature than his predecessor.新大使比他的前任更成熟一些。
41 petroleum WiUyi     
n.原油,石油
参考例句:
  • The Government of Iran advanced the price of petroleum last week.上星期伊朗政府提高了石油价格。
  • The purpose of oil refinery is to refine crude petroleum.炼油厂的主要工作是提炼原油。
42 coalition pWlyi     
n.结合体,同盟,结合,联合
参考例句:
  • The several parties formed a coalition.这几个政党组成了政治联盟。
  • Coalition forces take great care to avoid civilian casualties.联盟军队竭尽全力避免造成平民伤亡。
43 remarkable 8Vbx6     
adj.显著的,异常的,非凡的,值得注意的
参考例句:
  • She has made remarkable headway in her writing skills.她在写作技巧方面有了长足进步。
  • These cars are remarkable for the quietness of their engines.这些汽车因发动机没有噪音而不同凡响。
44 burnish gSayI     
v.磨光;使光滑
参考例句:
  • Many people,fearful for their jobs,are trying to burnish their contacts at other firms.许多人因为担心自己的工作,正在努力抹去和其他公司接触的痕迹。
  • I burnish joyful sparks from my sorrows.我从伤痛里擦亮喜悦的火花。
45 credentials credentials     
n.证明,资格,证明书,证件
参考例句:
  • He has long credentials of diplomatic service.他的外交工作资历很深。
  • Both candidates for the job have excellent credentials.此项工作的两个求职者都非常符合资格。
46 uncertainty NlFwK     
n.易变,靠不住,不确知,不确定的事物
参考例句:
  • Her comments will add to the uncertainty of the situation.她的批评将会使局势更加不稳定。
  • After six weeks of uncertainty,the strain was beginning to take its toll.6个星期的忐忑不安后,压力开始产生影响了。
47 coordinating fc35d08ba9bb2dcfdc96033a33b9ae1e     
v.使协调,使调和( coordinate的现在分词 );协调;协同;成为同等
参考例句:
  • He abolished the Operations Coordinating Board and the Planning Board. 他废除了行动协调委员会和计划委员会。 来自辞典例句
  • He's coordinating the wedding, and then we're not going to invite him? 他是来协调婚礼的,难道我们不去请他? 来自电影对白
48 dividends 8d58231a4112c505163466a7fcf9d097     
红利( dividend的名词复数 ); 股息; 被除数; (足球彩票的)彩金
参考例句:
  • Nothing pays richer dividends than magnanimity. 没有什么比宽宏大量更能得到厚报。
  • Their decision five years ago to computerise the company is now paying dividends. 五年前他们作出的使公司电脑化的决定现在正产生出效益。
49 consensus epMzA     
n.(意见等的)一致,一致同意,共识
参考例句:
  • Can we reach a consensus on this issue?我们能在这个问题上取得一致意见吗?
  • What is the consensus of opinion at the afternoon meeting?下午会议上一致的意见是什么?
50 controversy 6Z9y0     
n.争论,辩论,争吵
参考例句:
  • That is a fact beyond controversy.那是一个无可争论的事实。
  • We ran the risk of becoming the butt of every controversy.我们要冒使自己在所有的纷争中都成为众矢之的的风险。
51 brazen Id1yY     
adj.厚脸皮的,无耻的,坚硬的
参考例句:
  • The brazen woman laughed loudly at the judge who sentenced her.那无耻的女子冲着给她判刑的法官高声大笑。
  • Some people prefer to brazen a thing out rather than admit defeat.有的人不愿承认失败,而是宁肯厚着脸皮干下去。
52 weird bghw8     
adj.古怪的,离奇的;怪诞的,神秘而可怕的
参考例句:
  • From his weird behaviour,he seems a bit of an oddity.从他不寻常的行为看来,他好像有点怪。
  • His weird clothes really gas me.他的怪衣裳简直笑死人。
53 shipping WESyg     
n.船运(发货,运输,乘船)
参考例句:
  • We struck a bargain with an American shipping firm.我们和一家美国船运公司谈成了一笔生意。
  • There's a shipping charge of £5 added to the price.价格之外另加五英镑运输费。
54 debut IxGxy     
n.首次演出,初次露面
参考例句:
  • That same year he made his Broadway debut, playing a suave radio journalist.在那同一年里,他初次在百老汇登台,扮演一个温文而雅的电台记者。
  • The actress made her debut in the new comedy.这位演员在那出新喜剧中首次登台演出。
55 obstructing 34d98df4530e378b11391bdaa73cf7b5     
阻塞( obstruct的现在分词 ); 堵塞; 阻碍; 阻止
参考例句:
  • You can't park here, you're obstructing my driveway. 你不能在这里停车,你挡住了我家的车道。
  • He was charged for obstructing the highway. 他因阻碍交通而受控告。
56 censor GrDz7     
n./vt.审查,审查员;删改
参考例句:
  • The film has not been viewed by the censor.这部影片还未经审查人员审查。
  • The play was banned by the censor.该剧本被查禁了。
57 censored 5660261bf7fc03555e8d0f27b09dc6e5     
受审查的,被删剪的
参考例句:
  • The news reports had been heavily censored . 这些新闻报道已被大幅删剪。
  • The military-backed government has heavily censored the news. 有军方撑腰的政府对新闻进行了严格审查。
58 negotiations af4b5f3e98e178dd3c4bac64b625ecd0     
协商( negotiation的名词复数 ); 谈判; 完成(难事); 通过
参考例句:
  • negotiations for a durable peace 为持久和平而进行的谈判
  • Negotiations have failed to establish any middle ground. 谈判未能达成任何妥协。
59 outraged VmHz8n     
a.震惊的,义愤填膺的
参考例句:
  • Members of Parliament were outraged by the news of the assassination. 议会议员们被这暗杀的消息激怒了。
  • He was outraged by their behavior. 他们的行为使他感到愤慨。
60 gore gevzd     
n.凝血,血污;v.(动物)用角撞伤,用牙刺破;缝以补裆;顶
参考例句:
  • The fox lay dying in a pool of gore.狐狸倒在血泊中奄奄一息。
  • Carruthers had been gored by a rhinoceros.卡拉瑟斯被犀牛顶伤了。
61 bureaucrat Onryo     
n. 官僚作风的人,官僚,官僚政治论者
参考例句:
  • He was just another faceless bureaucrat.他只不过是一个典型呆板的官员。
  • The economy is still controlled by bureaucrats.经济依然被官僚们所掌控。
62 legitimate L9ZzJ     
adj.合法的,合理的,合乎逻辑的;v.使合法
参考例句:
  • Sickness is a legitimate reason for asking for leave.生病是请假的一个正当的理由。
  • That's a perfectly legitimate fear.怀有这种恐惧完全在情理之中。
63 inaccurate D9qx7     
adj.错误的,不正确的,不准确的
参考例句:
  • The book is both inaccurate and exaggerated.这本书不但不准确,而且夸大其词。
  • She never knows the right time because her watch is inaccurate.她从来不知道准确的时间因为她的表不准。
64 trump LU1zK     
n.王牌,法宝;v.打出王牌,吹喇叭
参考例句:
  • He was never able to trump up the courage to have a showdown.他始终鼓不起勇气摊牌。
  • The coach saved his star player for a trump card.教练保留他的明星选手,作为他的王牌。
65 gee ZsfzIu     
n.马;int.向右!前进!,惊讶时所发声音;v.向右转
参考例句:
  • Their success last week will gee the team up.上星期的胜利将激励这支队伍继续前进。
  • Gee,We're going to make a lot of money.哇!我们会赚好多钱啦!
66 deposed 4c31bf6e65f0ee73c1198c7dbedfd519     
v.罢免( depose的过去式和过去分词 );(在法庭上)宣誓作证
参考例句:
  • The president was deposed in a military coup. 总统在军事政变中被废黜。
  • The head of state was deposed by the army. 国家元首被军队罢免了。 来自《简明英汉词典》
67 viable mi2wZ     
adj.可行的,切实可行的,能活下去的
参考例句:
  • The scheme is economically viable.这个计划从经济效益来看是可行的。
  • The economy of the country is not viable.这个国家经济是难以维持的。
68 momentum DjZy8     
n.动力,冲力,势头;动量
参考例句:
  • We exploit the energy and momentum conservation laws in this way.我们就是这样利用能量和动量守恒定律的。
  • The law of momentum conservation could supplant Newton's third law.动量守恒定律可以取代牛顿第三定律。
69 mileage doOzUs     
n.里程,英里数;好处,利润
参考例句:
  • He doesn't think there's any mileage in that type of advertising.他认为做那种广告毫无效益。
  • What mileage has your car done?你的汽车跑了多少英里?
70 lining kpgzTO     
n.衬里,衬料
参考例句:
  • The lining of my coat is torn.我的外套衬里破了。
  • Moss makes an attractive lining to wire baskets.用苔藓垫在铁丝篮里很漂亮。
71 withdrawal Cfhwq     
n.取回,提款;撤退,撤军;收回,撤销
参考例句:
  • The police were forced to make a tactical withdrawal.警方被迫进行战术撤退。
  • They insisted upon a withdrawal of the statement and a public apology.他们坚持要收回那些话并公开道歉。
72 peddling c15a58556d0c84a06eb622ab9226ef81     
忙于琐事的,无关紧要的
参考例句:
  • He worked as a door-to-door salesman peddling cloths and brushes. 他的工作是上门推销抹布和刷子。
  • "If he doesn't like peddling, why doesn't he practice law? "要是他不高兴卖柴火,干吗不当律师呢?
73 affront pKvy6     
n./v.侮辱,触怒
参考例句:
  • Your behaviour is an affront to public decency.你的行为有伤风化。
  • This remark caused affront to many people.这句话得罪了不少人。
74 marketing Boez7e     
n.行销,在市场的买卖,买东西
参考例句:
  • They are developing marketing network.他们正在发展销售网络。
  • He often goes marketing.他经常去市场做生意。
75 complexity KO9z3     
n.复杂(性),复杂的事物
参考例句:
  • Only now did he understand the full complexity of the problem.直到现在他才明白这一问题的全部复杂性。
  • The complexity of the road map puzzled me.错综复杂的公路图把我搞糊涂了。
76 versus wi7wU     
prep.以…为对手,对;与…相比之下
参考例句:
  • The big match tonight is England versus Spain.今晚的大赛是英格兰对西班牙。
  • The most exciting game was Harvard versus Yale.最富紧张刺激的球赛是哈佛队对耶鲁队。
77 counteract vzlxb     
vt.对…起反作用,对抗,抵消
参考例句:
  • The doctor gave him some medicine to counteract the effect of the poison.医生给他些药解毒。
  • Our work calls for mutual support.We shouldn't counteract each other's efforts.工作要互相支持,不要互相拆台。
78 frustration 4hTxj     
n.挫折,失败,失效,落空
参考例句:
  • He had to fight back tears of frustration.他不得不强忍住失意的泪水。
  • He beat his hands on the steering wheel in frustration.他沮丧地用手打了几下方向盘。
79 killing kpBziQ     
n.巨额利润;突然赚大钱,发大财
参考例句:
  • Investors are set to make a killing from the sell-off.投资者准备清仓以便大赚一笔。
  • Last week my brother made a killing on Wall Street.上个周我兄弟在华尔街赚了一大笔。
80 frankly fsXzcf     
adv.坦白地,直率地;坦率地说
参考例句:
  • To speak frankly, I don't like the idea at all.老实说,我一点也不赞成这个主意。
  • Frankly speaking, I'm not opposed to reform.坦率地说,我不反对改革。
81 democrats 655beefefdcaf76097d489a3ff245f76     
n.民主主义者,民主人士( democrat的名词复数 )
参考例句:
  • The Democrats held a pep rally on Capitol Hill yesterday. 民主党昨天在国会山召开了竞选誓师大会。
  • The democrats organize a filibuster in the senate. 民主党党员组织了阻挠议事。 来自《简明英汉词典》
82 injustice O45yL     
n.非正义,不公正,不公平,侵犯(别人的)权利
参考例句:
  • They complained of injustice in the way they had been treated.他们抱怨受到不公平的对待。
  • All his life he has been struggling against injustice.他一生都在与不公正现象作斗争。
83 encompasses cba8673f835839b92e7b81ba5bccacfb     
v.围绕( encompass的第三人称单数 );包围;包含;包括
参考例句:
  • The job encompasses a wide range of responsibilities. 这项工作涉及的职责范围很广。
  • Its conservation law encompasses both its magnitude and its direction. 它的守恒定律包括大小和方向两方面。 来自辞典例句
84 immediate aapxh     
adj.立即的;直接的,最接近的;紧靠的
参考例句:
  • His immediate neighbours felt it their duty to call.他的近邻认为他们有责任去拜访。
  • We declared ourselves for the immediate convocation of the meeting.我们主张立即召开这个会议。
85 spikes jhXzrc     
n.穗( spike的名词复数 );跑鞋;(防滑)鞋钉;尖状物v.加烈酒于( spike的第三人称单数 );偷偷地给某人的饮料加入(更多)酒精( 或药物);把尖状物钉入;打乱某人的计划
参考例句:
  • a row of iron spikes on a wall 墙头的一排尖铁
  • There is a row of spikes on top of the prison wall to prevent the prisoners escaping. 监狱墙头装有一排尖钉,以防犯人逃跑。 来自《简明英汉词典》
86 migration mDpxj     
n.迁移,移居,(鸟类等的)迁徙
参考例句:
  • Swallows begin their migration south in autumn.燕子在秋季开始向南方迁移。
  • He described the vernal migration of birds in detail.他详细地描述了鸟的春季移居。
本文本内容来源于互联网抓取和网友提交,仅供参考,部分栏目没有内容,如果您有更合适的内容,欢迎点击提交分享给大家。
------分隔线----------------------------
TAG标签:   NPR  美国国家电台  英语听力
顶一下
(0)
0%
踩一下
(0)
0%
最新评论 查看所有评论
发表评论 查看所有评论
请自觉遵守互联网相关的政策法规,严禁发布色情、暴力、反动的言论。
评价:
表情:
验证码:
听力搜索
推荐频道
论坛新贴