经济发展与环境保护的英语辩论.docx

正方一辩陈述本方观点：从人类发展的终极目标看，我们要彻底地解决环境问题，必须要标本兼治。要治本，必须优先发展经济，从根本上优化经济结构堵住产生环境问题的源头，要治标，同样要优先发展经济，为解决眼前的环境问题提供技术、资金等支持，只有这样，才能为人类生存和发展提供环境保障。From the ultimate goal of human development, we need to address both the symptoms and root causes to solve the environmental problems thoroughly. To effect a permanent cure, we must give first priority to the development of economy, and optimize the economic structure fundamentally to block the source of the environment problems；To take temporary solution，we also should give priority to the development of economy, so that we have the technology, capital and other supportsfor solving the environmental problems. Only in this way can environment protection be provided for human survival and development. 反方一辩陈述本方观点：经济发展是指社会能够提供丰裕的商品来改善人类的物质生活,环境保护则是采取一定的政策措施来保护生态平衡。经济要发展意味着企业需要更多的厂房与原材料来保障商品的供应那便存在一个问题：自然分给人类的土地与原材料是有限,经济优先发展就一定会侵占原本不属于人类的自然资源。The economic development refers to society can provideabundant commodity to improve human material life; environmental protection is to take certain policy measures to protect the ecological balance. economic development means that companies need more workshop and raw materials to ensure the supply of goodsthen there is a problem, that isnature land and raw materials to human is limited, economic priority development will occupy nature resources which originally do not belong to the human.二辩盘问Two debate questioned反方二辩：请问对方一辩，经济是一时之事，环境是万代之事，哪个重要？经济发展慢了，人们还可以吃到饭，环境没了，还能生存吗？My fellow debaters ，please allow me to ask.The economy is the temporary matter, but the environment is ofthe ten thousandgeneration, which one is moreimportant? When Economic develops slowly, people can also eat rice; how can we still survive if there is no environment.正方一辩：不好意思对方辩友，恐怕我们今天讨论的重点是优先权。并不是说经济优先就不搞环保了，只是环保处于较次的位置，跟中国现状一样，政策虽然说要重视环保，但一般县区还是经济发展优先的，也就有资本的大城市才比较重视搞环保，相信大家心知肚明Sorry, Im afraid the key points we debate today are the right of priority.Economydevelopment firstdoes not mean totally ignorethe environmental protection,the environmental protection is just in the inferior position .Just like the present China, although the policy attach great importance to environmental protection, economic development receive priority in the general counties, there is onlycapital cities would likely take itseriously to environmental protection, everybody know it in our own heart.反方二辩：请问正方三辩，如果发展经济优先的话，很可能造成环境成本大于经济效益的情况，这样的经济是发展还是倒退？Excuse me, my fellow debaters. If economic development receivespriority then it is likely to cause the environmental costs to be larger than the economic efficiency, such economy develops or backs up? 正方三辩：这种情况确实有存在，但并不是每时每刻都存在。各个行业情况不同，我们不能以偏概全。但按你的意思，这种情况下经济效益是负的，那我们改行环境保护优先，就能转亏为盈？我不这么觉得。This kind of situation is theretruly, but not every moment. The situation in each industry is different; we cannot draw conclusions from one part. But according to your point, in this case the economic benefit is negative, then if we changed environment first, wecan turn it into profit? I dont think so.正方四辩补充发言：as a developing country, the economy power is far behind the developed counties, China have one fifth of the people in the world, but the income of per head is only in 109th among countries. so the urgent affairs of china is developing our economy. Second, economy growth doesnt necessarily conflict with environment protection. we can develop our economy without environment pollution .Third, when our economy strength become strong ,we can spend more money and energy on environment protection,till then it will be a win-win. In a word, considering the current situations, economy growth should take priority in China.正方二辩：我们知道环境的保护是预防为主，防治结合，而预防和治理都要依靠技术的发展，那请问对方一辩，如果没有强有力的经济基础支持科学技术发展，那么以科技为支撑的环保从何谈起呢？We know that the protection of the environment is mainlyprevention, and we should combine prevention with treatment, and the prevention and control depends on the development of technology, then my fellow debaters, if there is no strong economic basis for science and technology development, thendont mention the environmental protection supported by the science and technology.反方一辩：你的问题未免抽象了点。科技发展无止尽，经济发展也没尽头，什么时候算得上是“强有力”呢？但是环境保护是迫在眉睫，耽误不起。Your question is a little abstract. Science and technology develops endlessly, so dose economic development, when willit be considered as “strong? But environmental protection is imminent, which cant afford to delay.正方二辩：请问反方三辩，经济发展是让人们享受到丰富的生活内容，包括衣食住行娱乐，这难道不是现在社会上人们的普遍愿望吗？Excuse me, my fellow debaters.The responsibilityof economic development is to let people enjoy a rich life, including the basic necessities and entertainment, isnt it now the peoples universal desire? 反方三辩：人们喜欢的期望的不一定都是好的。我相信，人们更倾向于在一个既能享受到生活乐趣，同时又是一个健康和谐自然的环境中生存。Peoples expectation is not necessarily that good. I believe that people tend to live in a life of happiness, and at the same time, survive in a healthy and harmonious naturalenvironment 反方四辩补充发言：我们生活的环境，我们的子孙后代也要在这里生活。我们发展经济破坏了环境，有些破坏是无法弥补的，是对子孙后代的犯罪。现在世界各国都已高度重视可持续发展战略的研究，大力发展绿色工业，无公害产业。我国是具有悠久历史和文明的大国，在发展经济过程中更应该重视环境保护，为子孙后代留下美好的生活空间。 The environment we live in, our future generations have to live here. We destroy the environment of economic development, some damage is irreparable, the future generations of crime. Now countries around the world have attached great importance to the strategy of sustainable development research, vigorously develop the green industry, and pollution-free industries. China is a civilization with a long history and a big country in the process of economic development should also attach importance to environmental protection, to leave our future generations a better living space. 反方二辩小结：发展经济必须保护环境是自然规律的要求。经济发展过程中，如果自然环境受到了严重损害，那么我们将受到自然的严厉惩罚。重大的洪涝灾害都是破坏环境造成的必然结果。在抗洪救灾中消耗的人力、物力、财务恐怕已超过了牺牲环境的经济发展成果。自然规律是无情的，谁侵犯了它谁将受到它的报复。我们必须高度重视发展经济过程中保护自然环境和社会环境。we must protect the environment of economic development is a natural law requirements. The process of economic development, if the serious damage to the natural environment, then we will be natural to be severely punished. Major floods caused damage to the environment are the inevitable result. In the floods in the consumption of manpower, material and financial fear of the expense of the environment more than the fruits of economic development. The laws of nature is merciless, who violated it who will be its revenge. We must attach great importance to the process of economic development in the protection of the natural environment and social environment正方二辩小结：but you forget that China has 130 million people. The eastern cities cant stand for the whole China. We know that environment protection need high-technology, High-tech personnel, and science research. They all need a lot of money, and money is created by economy. I want to ask my fellow debater that can we protect our environment well without strong economy strength自由辩论正方一辩：请问对方辩友，原始社会的人类祖先们环境保护工作做得可谓好了吧，而他们经济发展很落后，所所以才一直过着钻木取火、茹毛饮血的生活，按你们的意思我们应该回归这种生活吗？Excuse me, my fellow friends .In the primitive society, human ancestors environmental protection work is good, but to them Economic development is very backward, so it has been living a life of the earliest people, should we return to this kind of life according to your meaning? 反方一辩：人类祖先确实需要发展经济，但若是在这个过程中砍完了森林，污染了河流，使衣食都不再有保障，恐怕也无法发展下去了。我想问的是，核电站是经济发展的产物，但众所周知，几次核电站的泄漏带来了环境的极度恶化，请问你怎么看？Human ancestors do need to develop the economy, but if cut out the forests,pollute the river, making Food and clothing are no longer guaranteedin this process, Im afraid it cannot developanylonger. What I want to ask is, nuclear power station is the outcome of the economic development, but it is well known that a few times nuclear power leakage has brought the environment extremely worsened, what do you thinkof it?正方二辩：首先，我方并没有承诺经济发展就一定会破坏到环境；其次，对方所说的情况只是凤毛麟角；第三，核电站泄漏是科技不力，而经济是科学研究的基础。First, we havenever pledge that the economic development certainly will destroy the environment; second,the situation you said is only rare; third, nuclear power station leakage because the technology is not strong. But economy is the foundation of scientific research.反方二辩：但是核电站可以再建，那些污染了的土地和地下水怎么办？没有了这些，我们的生活怎么办？你愿意生活在核电站附近，还是一片山清水秀之间？But the nuclear power station may be reconstructed, how aboutthese polluted land and the underground water? Without land and water, how does our life manage? Would you like to live nearby the nuclear power station, or between pieces of beautiful sceneries?正方三辩：但是对方辩友请注意，核电站的建造，正是为了千千万万人类的生活用电得到满足。有了电，我们的机器可以运作，生产可以兴起，环境总会有办法弥补，我也想问，你愿意生活在两小时停一次电的地方还是用电无忧之处？Please note that the construction of nuclear power stations is preciselyto satisfymillions of peoples living power. With the electricity, our machine can be operated, the production can rise, and there must be any way to make up for the environment. I also want to ask, are you willing to live in a place two hours stop a electricity or a place with abundant power.反方三辩：你的意思是破坏了环境然后再去弥补。为什么要先污染后治理？为什么要兜这么大一个圈子呢？而且我国的经济建设里程已经证明，先污染后治理是错的，行不通的。You mean to make up for the environment after destroyingit. Why management after pollution? Why to pocket so big a circle? And the economic construction of our country has already proved that treatment after pollution is wrong, it wont work.正方四辩：我不得不说我方真冤枉。是你给的前提，说核电站泄漏了，严重污染了环境，而我方坚信是可以挽救的。而且事实上，包括核电站在内的很多工业厂子，都种有青草绿树，他们在搞经济的同时，并没有放弃环境的保护。I can not but say that we are really undeserved. It is you who give the premise, said that the nuclear power station leakagehas polluted the environment seriously, but we believed that is can besaved.And in fact, including nuclear power stations, many industrial factories, plant all kinds of green grass and trees, while they practice the economy, theydo not give up the protection of the environment.反方四辩：但是仅仅不放弃就可以吗？再怎么注意也无法保证无污染，这样日积月累下来，依然会是一片惨状。必须把环境保护放在第一位，每个工厂都严抓，才能从根本上阻止环境的恶化。But only does not give up possible?Howeverdo we payattention to the environment, we cannot guaranteethere will be no pollution.As time goes on, itwill still be amiserablesituation. So we must place the environmental protection in the first place, each factory shouldbe managed strictly, only in this way, can we prevent the environment from worsening fundamentally.正方三辩：对方辩友请从事实出发，经济发展必然会付出代价，我们已经在努力使代价降到最低。Opposite party debates , please to start from the fact, the economic development will definitelypaythe price, we have been trying to make the price to a minimum.反方三辩：降低应该有个标准吧，这不是你我能定的，是自然环境定的，等到他揭示这个标准时，只怕为时已晚了。Reduces should have a standard, which is not you orme can decide, it is the natural environment, when he revealsthis standard, Im afraid it is too late.四辩总结正方四辩：首先，我是一个支持环保的人，拥有一个健康的生态环境是可持续发展得以进行的前提。但是，如果一味的保护环境，而忽视经济发展，那么对于经济的发展不利，对于人们生活水平的提高也同样不利。同时，我也必须强调，经济发展绝对不是破坏环境，那样的发展，也是违背自然规律的。在发展经济的同时，我们要兼顾治理环境，才是当今可持续发展经济的理念。First, I am a supporterof environmental protection. Having a healthy ecological environment is the premise of the sustainable development. But, if we blindly protect the environment, and neglect the economic development, then ithas not any good for both economical development and people living standard. At the same time, I must stress that the economic development not necessarilydestroy the environment, such developmentalso violates the natural law. While develop economy, we must give dual attention to the environmental protection, thisis the concept of sustainable economic development. 反方四辩：过去的发展道路走的就是先污染后治理的模式，结果呢，环境问题突出，局部地区已经到了威胁生存的程度：再者，先污染后治理的模式不但成本高，而且治理效果也不理想，处于一种被动的境地。因此，必须从源头开始防止污染，也就是发展过程首先考虑对环境的影响，只有这样，才能有望在将来解决环境问题。The past development road is a management-after-pollution pattern, the result is the environment problems standing out, and someareasevenreach the extent which threat survival; Furthermore, management-after-pollution pattern not only costs higher, but also is inefficient, sometimes in a passive position.Therefore, we must start to prevent pollution from the source, that is to consider the possible influence on the environment during the development process. Only in this way, can we except to solve environment problems in the future.英语辩论环境保护VS经济发展(经济发展正方）Which should receive priority in China?Environmental protection or economic growth.正方陈词：Good morning everyone! We are here now debating about whether environment protection or economy growth should take priority in China, we think its environment growth that should be chosen. I have three reasons to prove this point. First, as a developing country, the economy power is far behind the developed counties, China have one fifth of the people in the world, but the income of per head is only in 109th among countries. So the urgent affair of Chinais developing our economy. Second, economy growth doesnt necessarily conflict with environment protection. We can develop our economy without environment pollution.Third, when our economy strength becomes strong, we can spend more money and energy on environment protection,till then it will be a win-win. In a word, considering the current situations, economy growth should take priority in China.反方陈词：We agree economic growth is needed.But think about the past decades,we followed the old model of “first pollution,last treatment”, however, how did it come out? The environment problems have become increasingly prominent, and some local regions environment has been polluted to a dangerous extent that poses a great threat to our existence.Whats more, the cost was too high and the effect was not up to much. By this means, it placed us in a completely passive position. At the same time the people started voicing new values: quality of life, urban conservation and the environment.So,we must get to the bottom of the problem and learn from the past. That is, in the course of development, we should consider the effect of pollution and receive environment protection in first priority. Only in this way can we solve the environmental problems in the future reasonably. Thats all I want to say.自由辩论正方二辩：We all know that in many places of china like many poor countries,where the environment is pretty good, there are thousands people lack of moneyfor the food the need to live.Then, opponent debaters, do you think we still need to develop our economies?反方二辩：But opponent debaters cant ignore the fact that most areas of China have solved the problem of food and clothing at present.Furthermore, the level of economic development in many cities in eastern China is very high .But the pollution is pretty serious accordingly. We have money, but being under the sub health condition.Does it make any sense, opponent debaters?正方三辩：There do exist some eastern cities whose economy is quite developed, but you forget that China has 130 million people. The eastern cities cant stand for the whole China. We know that environment protection need high-technology, High-tech personnel, and science research. They all need a lot of money,and money is created by economy. I want to ask my fellow debater that can we protect our environment well without strong economy strength.反方三辩：Environmental protection needs economy . But we cant sacrifice the environment for the economic growth. If you drink polluted water, eat the toxic food, can we have a high quality of life? Economic development must be on the premise of environmental protection. The policy of “returning farmland to forests and grass” slow down the speed of economic development to protect the environment. Doses it show that the environmental protection is more important?正方：Opponent debaters have refer