首先，感谢你们刊发了有关美国气候变化的稿子。 但是，我也对中外对话对这篇文章的处理方法很失望。作为一个读者，我登陆这个网站是想了解中外对话对美国政策的分析。但我读到的却是一篇冗长的讲话全文。John McCain的讲话全文完全可以用一个外部联接来介绍。这种拷贝和粘贴大量从其他来源来的消息的做法引发了对中外对话编辑水平和质量的疑问。我相信，我不是唯一一个发现这一缺点的读者。伦敦的 Andrew

First thank you for publishing an article about the US climate change policy.

However, I am disappointed with the approach given to the article by chinadialogue. As a reader, I visit this site to obtain chinadialogue's analysis of issues. Instead, I find a rambling text of the entire John McCain speech. This information could have been provided as an external link.

The approach of just copying vast chunks of information from other sources gives rise to the question of chinadialogue's editorial qualities.

I am sure I am not the only reader to identify these shortcomings.

Andrew in London

我完全同意上面的评论。这篇文章的作者信息初一看令人搞不清楚.这是McCain为中外对话写的文章吗？我在这个网站上作了一点搜索，找到的有关美国气候变化的文章很少。而且，看起来，中外对话对美国共和党有偏袒的倾向。旧金山的John

I totally agree with the previous comment.

I was confused by who the author of the article was supposed to be. Did McCain write this piece for chinadialogue, as the title suggests?

I searched through this site and found few other articles about US climate change policy. It seems chinadialogue is rather biased to the Republicans.

LA, John

有两位读者对这一篇文章的刊发有想法，在此，我来作一点解释，为什么我们要全文刊发John McCain的讲话。在文章的摘要中，已明确说明这是John McCain的讲话而没有说这是他写给本网站的文章。美国的读者当然可以通过一个外部联接来了解这些内容。但是，我们的中国读者可能没有机会来得到这些信息，或者说它们的中文版。发表这篇文章并非表明对共和党有偏袒：我们没有政治联系（或者与美国大选有关的牵连）。但就目前美国执政共和党的政策来说，McCain的讲话是一个政策上的巨大转变，而且我们的中国读者了解它很重要。就气候谈判的紧迫性和美国大选在即， 所有候选人的讲话都会对后京都协议有影响。不管美国大选的结果如何，这些政策的转变现在已经有了影响。谢谢你们的反馈。我希望这能解释我们的做法。（中外对话总编 Isabel)

Two readers have complained about the publication of John McCain's speech,so let me explain why we published it in full. The standfirst clearly explains that it is the text of a speech, not an article written for chinadialogue. American readers, of course, could follow an external link and read the speech in full, butour Chinese readers might not have been able to access it, or might not have been able to read the untranslated text. Publishing the full text of a major statement on climate change by the Republican candidate for president does not imply bias towards the Republicans: we have no political affiliation (or any vote in US elections). But in view of the current Republican administration's policies, the McCain speech represents a significant shift and one that it is important for our Chinese readers to understand. Given the competing timetables of the climate negotiations and the US presidential elections, pre-election statements by all candidates impact the discussions on a post-Kyoto framework. Whatever the final outcome of the US race, these policy shifts have an impact now. Thank you for you feedback. I hope this has explained our thinking. Isabel Hilton (editor)

我认为这是一个重要的发布。事实上，三位总统候选人现在都强烈支持美国限制温室气体的行动，这标志着一个转折点。麦凯恩的讲话中真正令人惊讶的是，他呼吁这个行动，不管是否与其他国家互惠互利，包括中国。我想奥巴马和克林顿将采取同样的立场，并为美国在国际舞台上展示其诚意作准备。

Martin Bunzl
Director,
Initiative on Climate and Social Policy,
若歌大学
新泽西州，美国

I think this is an important post. The fact that all 3 Presidential candidates now support serious U.S. action to limit U.S. greenhouse gasses marks a turning point. The really surprising aspect of McCain's speech is that it calls for this action with or without recprocity from others, including China. I think Obama and Clinton will take the same position. And that sets the stage for the U.S. to (finally) establish its bona fides in this area on the international stage.

Martin Bunzl,
Director,
Initiative on Climate and Social Policy,
Rutger University,
New Jersey, USA.

"中外对话" 大篇幅的刊发共和党的观点显然就是在偏袒这个政党. 为何你们如此对待John McCain的讲话,而没有提到Barak Obama的政治观点呢?

再者,中外对话哪里全面报道过去年中国政府颁布的《中国应对气候变化国家方案》.也许,你们提到了一些这个方案的信息, 但同John McCain的讲话相比,根本不值得一提.

中外对话看来已经加入了西方广播界的大肆批判中国的队伍.

中国的巴金

Chinadialogue is obviously biased in its coverage of Republican viewpoints. Why else would you devote hundreds of words by John McCain but give no coverage of Barak Obama. And where was the in depth coverage of China's National Climate Change Programme which was released last year. A few words, yes, but nothing compared to the recent McCain article. Chinadialogue seems to be joining the ranks of Western broadcasters in its china bashing attitude.

Ba Jin (巴金）in China

巴金，我想中外对话以中文重新刊发McCain的讲话是因为这和中国的政策制定者有关，而非这个网站有什么政治牵连。

坦率地说，认为中外对话有右翼倾向的想法是很傻的。我很少看到别人这样去看这个问题。更为重要的是，刊发McCain的讲话为何就是批判中国呢？

McCain的讲话很有意思，那就是他的进步观点，无论中国是否参与全球气候变化协定。

我想，到可能是你应以非党派和国际观点来看待这个问题。

SL

Ba Jin: I think chinadialogue republished John McCain's speech in Chinese because it is very relevant for policy-makers in China, not because of a political affiliation. (Frankly, it seems a bit loony to suggest there is a right-wing bias at chinadialogue! I have seen very little to suggest this...). And more to the point, why is it "China-bashing" to publish McCain's speech? McCain's speech is interesting precisely because of its progressive attitude towards China's participation, or not, in a global deal on climate. I think, frankly, that it may be you who has to adopt a less partisan -- and more international -- perspective on this issue. SL

我也希望奥巴马关于气候变化的发言能够发表。这可以将中外对话从亲共和党的指控中解救出来。但更重要的是，麦凯恩的发言严重曲解了中国现在所进行的工作。例如，中国有全球80%的新型清洁煤电站而美国只有1到2个。和欧美电站相比，中国每周都会启动一个新电站，这对中国来说很重要，因为这些电站的效率要比传统的供热电站高20%-30%。 同时能够相应的降低同样比例的二氧化碳排放，即主要温室气体。美国和欧盟其实能够把这项新技术-超临界锅炉应用到他们现有的电站中，而中国却因是老电站不能这样做。第二中国在煤矿甲烷控制程序的发展很快，在清洁发展机制下和联合国及投资银行都有合作。甲烷对温室效应的加剧作用要比主要温室气体二氧化碳高20倍。同时这个项目也能够加强对矿工的安全保障。

大卫 菲克特
煤矿安全和能源顾问
北京

I would like to have seen Obama's statement on climate change published as well; this would have saved CD from accusations of pro-Republican bias. However, more important, McCain's speech is badly misinformed about what China is already doing. For example, China has 80% of the world's newest, clean coal power stations while the US has merely one or two prototypes. China is commissioning a new power plant every week and this is important, as these plants are between 20-30% more efficient in thermal terms, reducing CO2 (the main greenhouse gas) per unit of electricity by a similar amount, compared to US or European plant. The US and EU could actually retro-fit this technology (supercritical boilers) to many of their existing power stations, whereas China cannot do this to its older plant.

Second, China has a rapidly growing coal mine methane control programme, working with the UN and investment banks, under the Clean Development Mechanism. Methane is around 20 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than CO2 and this programme benefits miners' safety, uses a premium fuel which would otherwise cause global warming.

Dave Feickert

Coal mine safety and energy consultant

Beijing

就我对“中外对话”偏袒麦凯恩的评论再补充几句话。到现在尚不清楚为什么“中外对话”登载麦凯恩的环境计划，而早在2007年10月，奥巴马就曾对环境问题发表过有深度的演讲。“中外对话”转载过他的文章吗？很明显，没有。这是奥巴马有关未来清洁能源计划的 链接：

他表示“玉米为原料生产的乙醇不是应对能源挑战的最佳和长远的解决方法”，并且对于玉米乙醇的使用有着“正当的经济和生态上的担忧”。他还谈到需要投资到“诸如风能和太阳能，到2025年，美国就可以达到一个新的目标，实现全部用电的25%来自可再生能源。”与之对照，麦凯恩虽然提到了清洁能源，却没有提出具体的计划和日程。也许“中外对话”应该关注所有的竞选者，并对他们的观点给予均衡的报导。巴金

Further to my comment on a biased leaning to John McCain. It remains unclear why Chinadialogue prints his plans for the environment when Obama as early as October 2007 made in depth speeches on the subject. Where are the articles on Chinadialogue. Simple answer, nowhere. This is the [link] to Obama's plan for a clean energy future. He acknowledges that "corn ethanol is neither the perfect nor the permanent answer to our energy challenge" and that there are "legitimate economic and ecological concerns" over its use. He talks also about the need for investment in "clean energy sources like wind power and solar power, so that by 2025, America can meet a new standard that will require 25% of all our electricity to come from renewable sources." While McCain mentions clean energy sources he sets out no plan or date. Perhaps Chinadialogue should look at all the candidates and give a balanced report on their views.

Ba Jin (巴金)