[爆卦]disposal翻譯是什麼?優點缺點精華區懶人包

雖然這篇disposal翻譯鄉民發文沒有被收入到精華區:在disposal翻譯這個話題中,我們另外找到其它相關的精選爆讚文章

在 disposal翻譯產品中有2篇Facebook貼文,粉絲數超過7,534的網紅說說能源 Talk That Energy,也在其Facebook貼文中提到, ✔正常查核程序: 優先翻閱一手資料,若不懂則請教專家 ✖ TFC 台灣事實查核中心: 請教(有偏見)專家,也無對專家言論做查對 然後第一個說核能列入歐盟綠色轉型的不是台灣報導也不是哪個擁核媒體平台,是世界最大的媒體通訊社,美聯社以《EU leaders include nuclear energy...

  • disposal翻譯 在 說說能源 Talk That Energy Facebook 的最讚貼文

    2020-01-31 12:02:02
    有 251 人按讚

    ✔正常查核程序:
    優先翻閱一手資料,若不懂則請教專家
    ✖ TFC 台灣事實查核中心:
    請教(有偏見)專家,也無對專家言論做查對

    然後第一個說核能列入歐盟綠色轉型的不是台灣報導也不是哪個擁核媒體平台,是世界最大的媒體通訊社,美聯社以《EU leaders include nuclear energy in green transition》為標題報導歐盟高峰會結論,然後有紐約時報、日本時報等轉載刊登,到台灣因為翻譯就變成歐盟將核能納入綠色轉型。不懂台灣反核怎麼一直說別人世界最大平台假消息呢?

    ▉美聯社
    https://reurl.cc/5gmyV6

    范建德老師以2020/01/10的法案文字來認定歐盟要非核,但1/10有好多版本討論,法案文字都不是最終版,反核的還是綠黨提的...裏頭還要求2030歐盟要非核無煤阿...所以最後全部被刪光光也不意外。

    ▉法案文字
    2020/01/15(無反核定案版)
    https://reurl.cc/RdNl3Z
    2020/01/10(無反核草案)
    https://reurl.cc/4gx79v
    2020/01/10(反核草案)
    https://reurl.cc/Gk1R2v

    而台大風險中心趙研究員真的讓你看看什麼叫超譯...

    歐盟的技術文件裡提到核能在低碳能源中的重要腳色顯而易見,但確實在風險管理例如核廢料上難以將do no harm排除,很重要的一點,他有表明是因為現階段尚無啟用的核發電燃料的深層處置設施,所以無實例可以做評估。該報告也會在近一步針對核能做詳細討論。

    並非像趙研究員說的什麼沒有解方或要隔絕數百萬年...可以不要自己腦補嗎?明明裏投也跟你說有解法了...

    ▉報告這邊看
    https://reurl.cc/9zlYz8

    Regarding the long-term management of High-Level Waste (HLW), there is an international consensus that a safe, long-term technical solution is needed to solve the present unsustainable situation. A combination of temporary storage plus permanent disposal in geological formation is the most promising, with some countries are leading the way in implementing those solutions. Yet nowhere in the world has a viable, safe and long-term underground repository been established. It was therefore infeasible for the TEG to undertake a robust DNSH assessment as no permanent, operational disposal site for HLW exists yet from which long-term empirical, in-situ data and evidence to inform such an evaluation for nuclear energy.

    Given these limitations, it was not possible for TEG, nor its members, to conclude that the nuclear energy value chain does not cause significant harm to other environmental objectives on the time scales in question. The TEG has not therefore recommended the inclusion of nuclear energy in the Taxonomy at this stage. Further, the TEG recommends that more extensive technical work is undertaken on the DNSH aspects of nuclear energy in future and by a group with in-depth technical expertise on nuclear life cycle technologies and the existing and potential environmental impacts across all objectives.

  • disposal翻譯 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的最讚貼文

    2019-11-14 21:08:45
    有 938 人按讚


    【外國月亮不是特別圓】

    投入國際連結工作好一段時間,有時覺得大家也會期望「外國月亮總是特別圓」,但其實西方國家政治人物支持香港,從來不是理所當然,當中亦會涉及不少商業利益考慮和國際壓力,以及部份左傾政客仍會不知何故地,對中國共產政權抱有良好幻想,這種情況在歐洲較為明顯。

    德國左翼黨的國會議員,竟在國會發言表示「理應支持我們在北京的共產朋友」固然讓人大跌眼鏡,尤其是中共從根本地就是循從威權主義和國家資本主義的極右政黨。

    有時對於國際政客不理解香港,也是有點無奈,但我們香港作為國際大都會,對於世界各國的抗爭運動,又何嘗不是缺乏足夠理解,只盼在抗爭持續的情況下,香港人能夠繼續努力,讓世界理解我們,與香港同行。

    早前睇一份德國國會內嘅辦論,有位Die Linke嘅議員話要支持中共,因為大家都是左翼共產主義支持者,不用分得那麼細。我見內容有所偏頗就寫左篇文。中文翻譯見下文。
    Recently, a MP from Die Linke made some remarks about HK, and say they should support CCP as they are friend of Coummunism. I find the claims rather inaccurate hence I wrote this article to provide some rebuttals. Please scroll down for the English translation.

    Article in German: https://www.google.com/…/Hongkong-Krise-Pekings-Regierung-b…

    近日德國國會內, 一位Die Linke的國會議員Stefan Liebich對香港的事作出評價,這些評價實在令人難以茍同。

    Liebich指「Die Linke理應支持我們在北京的共產朋友」。但中國共產黨除了名字內有「共產」兩個字外,其實際行動與共產理念差天共地,實在不是Liebich想像中共產主義的好朋友。

    中國共產黨是一個極權,除了擴張政治與經濟勢力外,中國共產黨什麼都不會理會。不論是無產階級的死活,或者是工人階級,對於中國共產黨來說只是擴張實力的工具,隨時可以為了經濟或政治利益犧牲或捨棄。 中國共產黨實質上是由一群搜刮民脂民膏致富而滿肚腸肥的黨員領導。中國共產黨甚至對自己的人民進行全天候的監控,打壓、拘捕異見人士。

    由此可見,中國共產黨本質上是一個極右政黨,而非Liebich以為的左翼。 北京政府不是以共產理念管治中華人民共和國,反而是以物質主義操縱國民。中國背後並沒有一套穩固的價值觀支撐,唯有金錢才是中國人和中國政府信仰的理念。中國的任何行動,從來都不是由價值推動,而總是由金錢和利益推動。

    中國共產黨只是一個「掛羊頭賣狗肉」的「共產」黨,它相當擅長扮演共產主義的支持者,與Liebeich想像中「馬克思主義的的同路人」相差甚遠。我們應該要小心分辨真正的共產主義者與打著共產主義旗號行惡的政權之間的分別。

    Leibich亦在發言時提到八國聯軍與相關歷史,指「香港被英國以軍事手段從中國手中搶去。撇除對於中國的批評,我們樂見不公義的殖民主義完結」。但現實上,清朝是被當時被視為外族的滿洲人統治。當時的「中國」與今天我們認知的中華人民共和國並不是同一個國家。所以,Leibich所指的「香港被英國不公義的殖民」,其實嚴格來說是鴉片戰爭後,香港的管治權從滿洲人手中交到英國人手中。

    清朝末期發生申亥革命,中華民國成立。及後因國共內戰,中華民國政府輾轉於1949年12月撤退至臺灣。如果按照Leibich的邏輯,香港主權理應是移交予中華民國政府,而非中華人民共和國。

    另外,香港人本來擁有聯合國1960年在《給予殖民地國家和人民獨立宣言》中賦予非自治領土人民自決前途的權利。但因為中國強烈反對港澳被定義為殖民地,而應為「被英國和葡萄牙當局佔領的中國領土的一部分」。中國代表單方面宣稱港澳的地位,都屬中國主權範圍內,甚至指:「聯合國並沒有權討論這些問題。」最後才令香港再名單中被除名,失去前途自決的權利。

    而觀乎而今情況,即使香港主權移交予中國後,不公義不但沒有消失,反而更加明顯與嚴重。Leibeich在發言時指「撇除對於中國的批評,我們樂見不公義的殖民主義完結」,我很希望,他不是指他將無視數以百萬計的少數民族關押在在教育營當中、六四屠城死去的學生、香港早前被實彈近距離射中的兩位男孩、被24小時監控的中國人、捨生取義爭取人權的香港人,而去支持中國共產黨只因其聲稱自己是「共產主義者」。

    人權自由是人類文明近百年來的基石,中國共產黨的行為,與絕大部分我們珍視的政治價值並不相容。在任何情況下,我們都不可能支持一個獨裁的殺人政權。

    Recently, in the German Bundestag, Stefan Liebich made a few remarks regarding Hong Kong. Mr. Liebeich says his party Der Linke should support their communist friends in Beijing. “Logisch, dass Der Linke Liebich seinen Kommunistenfreunden in Peking wieder den Rücken stärkt.(It is logical that Die Linke Liebich should again support his communist friends in Beijing.)” In my point of view, the Chinese Communist Party is just a party named itself as the “Communist”, what it does in China or in the world is in no way communistic.

    PRC is a dictatorship that only takes the expansion of its economic and political power into regard, workers or its people are at its disposal whenever it sees fit. The “Communist” party cares neither about the people, nor the grassroots, it only cares about the economic benefit it gains from its business activities inside and outside PRC. The party leaders are all sitting in their offices with their pockets full of what they gain from exploiting the Chinese workers.
    They carry mass surveillance 24/7 throughout China, arrests and detain descendants. Frankly speaking, the CCP is rather right than left.

    The Peking Government is not running Communism, but materialism. The only thing the Chinese and the Chinese government worship is the dollar sign, nothing else. They do not take any values or ideology into account. The people are not motivated by values or beliefs, but by the economic benefits they see.

    The CCP is not a communist party as Mr. Leibich conceived it is. The CCP is very good at creating the illusion that it represents the Marxist ideas. We should be very careful in examining the differences between those who claim to be communists and those who are communists.

    Mr. Leibich also made reference to the history of the Eight-Nation Alliance in the late Qing Dynasty, saying that“ Auch Hongkong ist durch die britische Armee militärisch China abgepresst worden.(Hong Kong has been militarily squeezed out of China by the British army.)” and “Bei aller notwendigen Kritik an der chinesischen KP sagen ich: Es ist gut, dass dieses koloniale Unrecht zu Ende ist. (Despite all the necessary criticism of the Chinese Communist Party, I say: It is good that this colonial injustice has come to an end.)”

    It is worth clarifying that during that time of History, China was ruled by the Manchus, who were considered as foreigners at the time. China at the time was not the Republic of China we know today. Therefore, Hong Kong was not military squeezed out of PRC but was being colonized by the British in substitution of the Manchus at that time.

    Historically speaking, the successor of the Qing Dynasty is the Republic of China, which later was relocated to Taiwan due to the Civil War between 1927 and 1949. And Mr. Leibich’s claim that it is good that colonial injustice has come to an end is inaccurate, too. In this case, Hong Kong, ought to be returned to Taiwan (the Republic of China) but not China (People’s Republic of China), to end the colonial injustice.

    What is more, Hong Kongers were supposed to be able to exercise our right to self-determination and really being able to be free from colonialism. Yet Hong Kong was actually removed from the U.N. list of Non-Self-Governing Territories upon PRC’s request.

    And clearly, under PRC’s rule, injustice is more than just apparent in Hong Kong currently. Mr. Leibich’s remarks of “despite all the necessary criticism of the Chinese Communist Party”, I truly hope that he is not suggesting that one would neglect the millions of ethnic minorities being detained in re-education camps, those who died in the JuneForth Masaccare, the two young Hong Kong boys who were shot by live rounds, the Chinese who were placed under surveillance 24/7 and all my fellow Hong Konger who are fighting for fundamental rights with their lives, but support the CCP’s action because it claims to be a communist party.

    I see of no reason, why anyone should support a dictatorship that would brutally murder its own people. CCP is totally going against what most political ideologies in the world stand for, and I do believe we can all agree on the fundamental rights of all members of the human family that ought to be respected as that is the foundations of human civilization.

你可能也想看看

搜尋相關網站