当前位置：首页 > news >正文

雅思练习总结（二十九）

news 2025/7/15 7:14:23

雅思练习总结（二十九）

本文章是雅思练习总结（二十九），总结了文章《The True Cost Of Food》，内容包括原文精翻，文章脉络总结，单词扩展学习3个部分

1 文章原文及翻译

The True Cost Of Food

翻译：食物的真实代价

A
For more than forty years the cost of food has been rising. It has now reached a point where a growing number of people believe that it is far too high, and that bringing it down will be one of the great challenges of the twenty first century. That cost, however, is not in immediate cash. In the west at least, most food is now far cheaper to buy in relative terms than it was in 1960. The cost is in the collateral damage of the very methods of food production that have made the food cheaper: in the pollution of water, the enervation of soil, the destruction of wildlife, the harm to animal welfare and the threat to human health caused by modern industrial agriculture.

翻译：四十多年来，食品成本持续攀升。如今，越来越多的人认为食品价格已高得离谱，而降低食物成本也将成为 21 世纪的重大挑战之一。然而，这里的 “成本” 并非直接体现在现金价格上。至少在西方，如今大多数食品的相对购买成本远低于 1960 年。真正的成本在于那些使食品价格降低的生产方式所造成的附带损害：现代工业化农业导致水源污染、土壤肥力衰退、野生动物灭绝、动物福利受损，以及对人类健康构成威胁。

B
First mechanisation, then mass use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides, then monocultures, then battery rearing of livestock, and now genetic engineering - the onward march of intensive farming has seemed unstoppable in the last half-century, as the yields of produce have soared. But the damage it has caused has been colossal. In Britain, for example, many of our best-loved farmland birds, such as the skylark, the grey partridge, the lapwing and the corn bunting, have vanished from huge stretches of countryside, as have even more wild flowers and insects. This is a direct result of the way we have produced our food in the last four decades. Thousands of miles of hedgerows, thousands of ponds, have disappeared from the landscape. The faecal filth of salmon farming has driven wild salmon from many of the sea lochs and rivers of Scotland. Natural soil fertility is dropping in many areas because of continuous industrial fertiliser and pesticide use, while the growth of algae is increasing in lakes because of the fertiliser run-off.

翻译：先是机械化，接着是化肥和农药的大规模使用，然后是单一作物种植、工厂化养殖，如今又发展到基因工程 —— 在过去半个世纪里，随着农产品产量的飙升，集约化农业的前进步伐似乎不可阻挡。但它造成的破坏却是巨大的。例如，在英国，许多我们最喜爱的农田鸟类，如云雀、灰山鹑、凤头麦鸡和黍鹀，已从大片乡村消失，更多的野花和昆虫也是如此。上述这些，正是过去四十年间我们生产粮食的方式所导致的直接后果。数千英里的树篱和成千上万的池塘从这片土地上消失了。鲑鱼养殖产生的粪便污染，已将野生鲑鱼赶出了苏格兰的许多海湾和河流。由于持续使用工业化肥和农药，许多地区的自然土壤肥力正在下降；而化肥径流则导致湖泊中的藻类大量繁殖。

C
Put it all together and it looks like a battlefield, but consumers rarely make the connection at the dinner table. That is mainly because the costs of all this damage are what economists refer to as externalities: they are outside the main transaction, which is for example producing and selling a field of wheat, and are borne directly by neither producers nor consumers. To many, the costs may not even appear to be financial at all, but merely aesthetic - a terrible shame, but nothing to do with money. And anyway they, as consumers of food, certainly aren’t paying for it, are they?

翻译：当我们把这些现象堆叠在一起的时候，情况紧张地就像看是的一片战场，但在餐桌上，消费者们却很少将两者联系起来。这主要是因为所有这些破坏的代价在经济学家看来属于 “外部性成本”：它们不在生产和销售小麦等主要交易环节之内，而生产者和消费者都无需直接承担。对许多人来说，这些代价甚至似乎根本不是金钱上的，而仅仅是一种审美层面的巨大的遗憾，但与金钱无关。而且无论如何，作为食品消费者，他们显然没有为此买单。但果真如此嘛？

D
But the costs to society can actually be quantified and, when added up, can amount to staggering sums. A remarkable exercise in doing this has been carried out by one of the world’s leading thinkers on the future of agriculture, Professor Jules Pretty, Director of the Centre for Environment and Society at the University of Essex. Professor Pretty and his colleagues calculated the externalities of British agriculture for one particular year. They added up the costs of repairing the damage it caused, and came up with a total figure of ￡2,343m. This is equivalent to ￡208 for every hectare of arable land and permanent pasture, almost as much again as the total government and EU spend on British farming in that year. And according to Professor Pretty, it was a conservative estimate.

翻译：但这些对社会造成的代价实际上是可以量化的，它们的数额加起来更是惊人。世界农业未来领域的顶尖思想家之一、埃塞克斯大学环境与社会中心主任朱尔斯・普雷蒂教授，进行了一项卓越的相关研究。普雷蒂教授及其同事计算了英国农业某一年的外部性成本。他们累加了修复农业造成的损害所需的费用，得出的总金额为 23.43 亿英镑。这相当于每公顷耕地和永久牧场 208 英镑，几乎与当年英国政府和欧盟对农业的总投入相当。而据普雷蒂教授说，这还只是保守估计。

E
The costs included: ￡120m for removal of pesticides; ￡16m for removal of nitrates; ￡55m for removal of phosphates and soil; ￡23m for the removal of the bug cryptosporidium from drinking water by water companies; ￡125m for damage to wildlife habitats, hedgerows and dry stone walls; ￡1,113m from emissions of gases likely to contribute to climate change; ￡106m from soil erosion and organic carbon losses; ￡169m from food poisoning; and ￡607m from cattle disease. Professor Pretty draws a simple but memorable conclusion from all this: our food bills are actually threefold. We are paying for our supposedly cheaper food in three separate ways: once over the counter, secondly through our taxes, which provide the enormous subsidies propping up modern intensive farming, and thirdly to clean up the mess that modern farming leaves behind.

翻译：这些成本包括：1.2 亿英镑的农药清除费用；1600 万英镑的硝酸盐清除费用；5500 万英镑的磷酸盐和土壤清除费用；自来水公司为从饮用水中清除隐孢子虫花费的 2300 万英镑；1.25 亿英镑的野生动物栖息地、树篱和干石墙破坏损失；11.13 亿英镑的可能加剧气候变化的气体排放成本；1.06 亿英镑的土壤侵蚀和有机碳流失成本；1.69 亿英镑的食物中毒成本；以及 6.07 亿英镑的牛类疾病成本。普雷蒂教授从中得出了一个简单却令人难忘的结论：我们的食品账单实际上是三重的。我们以三种不同的方式为所谓 “更便宜” 的食品买单：一是在柜台前支付的货款，二是通过税收 —— 这些税收为现代集约化农业提供了巨额补贴，三是为清理现代农业留下的烂摊子买单。

F
So can the true cost of food be brought down? Breaking away from industrial agriculture as the solution to hunger may be very hard for some countries, but in Britain, where the immediate need to supply food is less urgent, and the costs and the damage of intensive farming have been clearly seen, it may be more feasible. The government needs to create sustainable, competitive and diverse farming and food sectors, which will contribute to a thriving and sustainable rural economy, and advance environmental, economic, health, and animal welfare goals.

翻译：那么，食品的真实成本能否降低呢？对某些国家来说，摆脱工业化农业作为解决饥饿的途径可能非常困难，但在英国，由于食品供应的紧迫性较低，且集约化农业的成本和破坏已清晰可见，这或许更具可行性。政府需要创建可持续、有竞争力和多样化的农业和食品部门，这将有助于农村经济的繁荣和可持续发展，并推进环境、经济、健康和动物福利目标。

G
But if industrial agriculture is to be replaced, what is a viable alternative? Professor Pretty feels that organic farming would be too big a jump in thinking and in practices for many farmers. Furthermore, the price premium would put the produce out of reach of many poorer consumers. He is recommending the immediate introduction of a ‘Greener Food Standard’, which would push the market towards more sustainable environmental practices than the current norm, while not requiring the full commitment to organic production. Such a standard would comprise agreed practices for different kinds of farming, covering agrochemical use, soil health, land management, water and energy use, food safety and animal health. It could go a long way, he says, to shifting consumers as well as farmers towards a more sustainable system of agriculture.

翻译：但如果要取代工业化农业，可行的替代方案是什么呢？普雷蒂教授认为，对许多农民来说，转向有机农业在思想和实践上的跨越太大。此外，价格溢价会使许多贫困消费者无法购买这些产品。他建议立即引入 “更绿色食品标准”，这将推动市场采用比当前常规做法更可持续的环境实践，同时不要求完全致力于有机生产。这一标准将包括针对不同农业类型的约定做法，涵盖农用化学品使用、土壤健康、土地管理、水和能源利用、食品安全和动物健康等方面。他说，这将在很大程度上推动消费者和农民转向更可持续的农业体系。

2 文章结构分析

这篇文章的内容总结如下：

A 段是总写的一段，说的是，近四十年食品现金价格看似下降（西方相对成本低于 1960 年），但 “真实成本” 藏在工业化生产的隐性代价中。水污染、土壤退化、野生动物灭绝、动物福利损害、人类健康威胁，均由现代集约化农业导致。
B段主要梳理了现代农业的发展历程，机械化→化肥农药→单一作物→工厂化养殖→基因工程，推动产量飙升，但生态破坏触目惊心。云雀、灰山鹑等农田鸟类及野花昆虫大规模绝迹，树篱、池塘锐减。鲑鱼养殖粪便驱逐野生鲑鱼；化肥滥用导致土壤肥力下降、湖泊藻类爆发。
C段说的是，虽然这些变化触目惊心，但是大伙儿却觉得不以为意，因为环境破坏成本未纳入食品交易价格，而是由社会间接承担（如政府治理污染、生态修复）。公众视破坏为 “美学遗憾” 而非经济代价，误以为 “便宜食品” 无需自己买单。
D段和E段说的是，根据普雷蒂教授的的计算，英国某一年农业外部性成本达 23.43 亿英镑，相当于每公顷耕地 208 英镑，与政府农业补贴相当（保守估计）。农药 / 硝酸盐清除（1.36 亿英镑）、饮用水除虫（2300 万英镑）、野生动植物栖息地破坏（1.25 亿英镑）、气候污染（11.13 亿英镑）、食物中毒（1.69 亿英镑）、消费者为 “低价食品” 实际支付三次 —— 购买价、税收补贴、环境治理费。
F段，G段说的是，英国粮食安全压力较小，集约化农业恶果已显，具备改革可行性。但是作为替代方案的有机农业，对农民观念与技术要求过高，价格溢价可能剥夺穷人选择权。因此需要一个中间路线，即引入 “更绿色食品标准”，推动可持续实践（如限用农药、保护土壤），无需完全转向有机，平衡环境与可及性。

文章整体结构如下

3 重难点词汇总结

collateral 根据剑桥词典， collateral 这个单词（出现在 A 段）的意思是抵押品 / （血管或神经）侧支 / 次要的，这里取的是次要的这个意思

collateral 含义1

collateral 含义2

enervation 根据剑桥词典， enervation 这个单词（出现在 A 段）的意思是衰弱 / 丧尸活力，其形容词形式为 enervating 使衰弱的 / 使丧失活力的，这里 enervation 没有直接的意义可以查找，但是可以猜出来意思

enervation 含义

fertilizer 根据剑桥词典， fertilizer 这个单词（出现在 B 段）的意思是肥料

fertilizer 含义

pesticide 根据剑桥词典， pesticide 这个单词（出现在 B 段）的意思是农药

pesticide 含义

monoculture 根据剑桥词典， monoculture 这个单词（出现在 B 段）的意思是（农业）单作 / 单一养殖（或种植）的地区 / 单一文化

monoculture 含义1

monoculture 含义2

rear 根据剑桥词典， rear 这个单词（出现在 B 段）的意思是后部的 / 屁股 / 养育 / 竖起，当作为 the rear 出现时，意为背部，文中这里 the battery rear of livestocks 意为工业化的牲畜养殖

rear 含义1

rear 含义2

rear 含义3

the rear 含义

battery 根据剑桥词典， battery 这个单词（出现在 B 段）的意思是电池 / 炮阵 / 暴力行为 / 工业式养殖的

battery 含义1

battery 含义2

intensive farming 根据剑桥词典， intensive farming 这个单词（出现在 B 段）的意思是（集约的）农业

intensive farming 含义

skylark 根据剑桥词典， skylark 这个单词（出现在 B 段）的意思是百灵鸟

skylark 含义

partridge 根据剑桥词典， partridge 这个单词（出现在 B 段）的意思是鹧鸪

partridge 含义

lapwing 根据剑桥词典， lapwing 这个单词（出现在 B 段）的意思是凤头麦鸡，这个单词是 lap + wing 的组合，形容鸡非常形象
stretch 根据剑桥词典， stretch 这个单词（出现在 B 段）的意思是伸出 / 舒展（四肢） / 展开 / 到…的限度 / （使弹性物）拉长 / 有弹性 / 延续 / 延长（…的期限） / （工作或任务）使施展本领 / （土地或水域的）一段 / （赛跑的）阶段 / 伸展 / 超过限度 / 弹性 / （连续的）一段时间 / 服刑期 / （演员的）有难度的表演，作为 at a stretch 出现时，意为连续的 / 不间断的 ,作为 (at) full stretch 出现时,意为全力以赴地，作为 by no stretch 出现时，意为无论如何也难以相信

stretch 含义1