经济发展与环境保护英文辩论赛_英文辩论赛常用语
经济发展与环境保护英文辩论赛由刀豆文库小编整理，希望给你工作、学习、生活带来方便，猜你可能喜欢“英文辩论赛常用语”。
Which should receive priority in china，economic growth or environmental protection？ Theoretical cliche 正方一辩：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 addre 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 supports for solving the environmental problems.Only in this way can environment protection be provided for human survival and development.反方一辩：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 provide abundant 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 goods——then there is a problem, that is nature 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：请问对方二辩，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 of the ten thousand generation, which one is more important? When Economic develops slowly, people can also eat rice;how can we still survive if there is no environment.正方二辩：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, I'm afraid the key points we debate today are the right of priority.Economy development first does not mean totally ignore the 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 only capital cities would likely take it seriously 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 receives priority then it is likely 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。to cause This kind of situation is there truly, 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, we can turn it into profit? I don't think so.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，那请问对方二辩，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 mainly prevention, 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, then don’t mention the environmental protection supported by the science and technology.反方二辩：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 endlely, so dose economic development, when will it be considered as “strong"? But environmental protection is imminent, which can't 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 responsibility of economic development is to let people enjoy a rich life, including the basic neceities and entertainment, isn't it now the people's 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。People`s expectation is not necearily that good.I believe that people tend to live in a life of happine, and at the same time, survive in a healthy and harmonious natural environment 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 ancestor`s 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 guaranteed in this proce, I’m afraid it cannot develop any longer.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 think of 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 have never 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 about these 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 precisely to satisfy millions of people's 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 destroying it.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 won't 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 leakage has polluted the environment seriously, but we believed that is can be saved.And in fact, including nuclear power stations, many industrial factories, plant all kinds of green gra and trees, while they practice the economy, they do 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 poible? However do we pay attention to the environment, we cannot guarantee there will be no pollution.As time goes on, it will still be a miserable situation.So we must place the environmental protection in the first place, each factory should be 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 definitely pay the 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 or me can decide, it is the natural environment, when he reveals this standard, I’m 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 supporter of 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 it has not any good for both economical development and people living standard.At the same time, I must stre that the economic development not necearily destroy the environment, such development also violates the natural law.While develop economy, we must give dual attention to the environmental protection, this is 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 some areas even reach the extent which threat survival;Furthermore, management-after-pollution pattern not only costs higher, but also is inefficient, sometimes in a paive position.Therefore, we must start to prevent pollution from the source, that is to consider the poible influence on the environment during the development proce.Only in this
way, can we except to solve environment problems in the future.
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......
经济发展与环境保护英文辩论赛Which should receive priority in china, economic growth or environmental protection？ Theoretical cliché正方一辩：从人类发展的终极目标......
Which should receive priority in china ，economic growth or environmental protection？正方一辩：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......
辩论赛：经济发展和环境保护应何者优先？正方：环境保护应优先于经济发展 反方：经济发展应优先于环境保护 反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......
Economic Development and EnvironmentalProtectionThere are some individuals who argue that, compared to the environment protection, the top priority is supposed......
