求高手翻译
Intheearlydaysofnuclearpower,theUnitedStatesmakemoneyonit.Buttodayopponents(反对者)haves...
In the early days of nuclear power, the United States make money on it. But today opponents (反对者) have so complicated its development that no nuclear plants have been ordered or built here in 12 years.
The greatest fear of nuclear power opponents has always been a reactor “meltdown”. Today, the chances of a meltdown that would threaten U.S. public health are very little. But to even further reduce the possibility, engineers are testing new reactors that rely not on human judgment to shut them down but on the laws of nature. Now General Electric is already building two advanced reactors in Japan. But don't expect them even on U.S. shores unless things change in Washington.
The procedure for licensing nuclear power plants is a bad dream. Any time during, or even after, construction, an objection by any group or individual can bring everything to a stop while the matter is investigated or taken to court. Meanwhile, the builder must add nice–but–not–necessary improvements, some of which force him to knock down walls and start over. In every case when a plant has been opposed, the Nuclear Regulation Commission has ultimately granted a license to construct or operate. But the victory often costs so much that the utility ends up abandoning the plant anyway.
A case in point is the Shoreham plant on New York's Long Island. Shoreham was a virtual twin to the Millstone plant in Connecticut, both ordered in the mid-60s. Millstone, completed for ＄101 million, has been generating electricity for two decades. Shoreham, however, was singled out by antinuclear activists who, by sending in endless protests, drove the cost over $5 billion and delayed its use for many years.
Shoreham finally won its operation license. But the plant has never produced a watt power. Governor Mario Cuomo, an opponent of a Shoreham start-up, used his power to force New York’s public-utilities commission to accept the following settlement: the power company could pass the cost of Shoreham along to its consumers only if it agreed not to operate the plant. Today, a perfectly good facility, capable of servicing hundreds of thousands of homes, sits rusting. 展开
The greatest fear of nuclear power opponents has always been a reactor “meltdown”. Today, the chances of a meltdown that would threaten U.S. public health are very little. But to even further reduce the possibility, engineers are testing new reactors that rely not on human judgment to shut them down but on the laws of nature. Now General Electric is already building two advanced reactors in Japan. But don't expect them even on U.S. shores unless things change in Washington.
The procedure for licensing nuclear power plants is a bad dream. Any time during, or even after, construction, an objection by any group or individual can bring everything to a stop while the matter is investigated or taken to court. Meanwhile, the builder must add nice–but–not–necessary improvements, some of which force him to knock down walls and start over. In every case when a plant has been opposed, the Nuclear Regulation Commission has ultimately granted a license to construct or operate. But the victory often costs so much that the utility ends up abandoning the plant anyway.
A case in point is the Shoreham plant on New York's Long Island. Shoreham was a virtual twin to the Millstone plant in Connecticut, both ordered in the mid-60s. Millstone, completed for ＄101 million, has been generating electricity for two decades. Shoreham, however, was singled out by antinuclear activists who, by sending in endless protests, drove the cost over $5 billion and delayed its use for many years.
Shoreham finally won its operation license. But the plant has never produced a watt power. Governor Mario Cuomo, an opponent of a Shoreham start-up, used his power to force New York’s public-utilities commission to accept the following settlement: the power company could pass the cost of Shoreham along to its consumers only if it agreed not to operate the plant. Today, a perfectly good facility, capable of servicing hundreds of thousands of homes, sits rusting. 展开
3个回答
展开全部
翻译：在核能开发的早期，美国人靠它赚钱。但是反对者将其发展弄得举步维艰以致于12年内这里再也没有过核电站的建设与规划。核能反对者的最大的恐惧来源于一个叫“堆内熔化”的反应堆。今天，这种“堆内熔化”威胁到公众安全的几率已经极其微小了。但为了进一步降低其可能性，工程师正在测试一种可以通过自然法则而不需要借助于人类的判断来关闭的反应堆。现在General Electric （通用电气）已经在日本建立两个这种先进的反应堆。但是别指望会在美国的海滨出现除非华盛顿的政局发生改变。
允许核电站的过程就是一个噩梦。在建设过程中甚至结束后，来自任何团体或者个人的反对意见都足以让一切停止运作，同时这件事情一直被审查甚至被告上法庭。其间，建设者必须添加一些良好但不必需的改进，有些改进措施迫使他们要把基墙拆掉重新来过。但凡核电站遭到反对，核监管委员会都必须颁发许可证以保证建设和运转。但是，胜利总是要付出巨大代价的以致于最终只能取消核电站的建设。
很好的一个例子就是美国长岛的Shoreham核电站。Shoreham核电站是康涅狄格州的Millstone核电站的不折不扣的双胞胎，都被命令建造于60年代中期。Millstone花了1.01亿美元建成，已经供电20年了。然而，Shoreham反核激进主义者的挑剔，他们通过不断的递送抗议，而使得成本超过了50亿美元并延迟了很多年才得以使用。
Shoreham最终获得了其运作许可证。但是该核电站也从没有发过哪怕一瓦的电。Governor Mario Guomo，Shoreham 建立的反对者之一，通过他的政权迫使纽约公共事业委员会接受以下条款：只有在他们同意不运作这个核电站的条件下，电力公司才可以将他们建设Shoreham 的成本转嫁给消费者。今天，一个能为成百上千户家庭服务的完美设施只能放在那里生锈了。
允许核电站的过程就是一个噩梦。在建设过程中甚至结束后，来自任何团体或者个人的反对意见都足以让一切停止运作，同时这件事情一直被审查甚至被告上法庭。其间，建设者必须添加一些良好但不必需的改进，有些改进措施迫使他们要把基墙拆掉重新来过。但凡核电站遭到反对，核监管委员会都必须颁发许可证以保证建设和运转。但是，胜利总是要付出巨大代价的以致于最终只能取消核电站的建设。
很好的一个例子就是美国长岛的Shoreham核电站。Shoreham核电站是康涅狄格州的Millstone核电站的不折不扣的双胞胎，都被命令建造于60年代中期。Millstone花了1.01亿美元建成，已经供电20年了。然而，Shoreham反核激进主义者的挑剔，他们通过不断的递送抗议，而使得成本超过了50亿美元并延迟了很多年才得以使用。
Shoreham最终获得了其运作许可证。但是该核电站也从没有发过哪怕一瓦的电。Governor Mario Guomo，Shoreham 建立的反对者之一，通过他的政权迫使纽约公共事业委员会接受以下条款：只有在他们同意不运作这个核电站的条件下，电力公司才可以将他们建设Shoreham 的成本转嫁给消费者。今天，一个能为成百上千户家庭服务的完美设施只能放在那里生锈了。
参考资料： http://zhidao.baidu.com/question/279228855.html
已赞过
已踩过<
评论
收起
你对这个回答的评价是？
展开全部
这么长，麻烦加到30分以上吧
已赞过
已踩过<
评论
收起
你对这个回答的评价是？
展开全部
In the early days of nuclear power, the United States make money on it. But today opponents (反对者) have so complicated its development that no nuclear plants have been ordered or built here in 12 years.
The greatest fear of nuclear power opponents has always been a reactor “meltdown”. Today, the chances of a meltdown that would threaten U.S. public health are very little. But to even further reduce the possibility, engineers are testing new reactors that rely not on human judgment to shut them down but on the laws of nature. Now General Electric is already building two advanced reactors in Japan. But don't expect them even on U.S. shores unless things change in Washington.
The procedure for licensing nuclear power plants is a bad dream. Any time during, or even after, construction, an objection by any group or individual can bring everything to a stop while the matter is investigated or taken to court. Meanwhile, the builder must add nice–but–not–necessary improvements, some of which force him to knock down walls and start over. In every case when a plant has been opposed, the Nuclear Regulation Commission has ultimately granted a license to construct or operate. But the victory often costs so much that the utility ends up abandoning the plant anyway.
A case in point is the Shoreham plant on New York's Long Island. Shoreham was a virtual twin to the Millstone plant in Connecticut, both ordered in the mid-60s. Millstone, completed for ＄101 million, has been generating electricity for two decades. Shoreham, however, was singled out by antinuclear activists who, by sending in endless protests, drove the cost over $5 billion and delayed its use for many years.
Shoreham finally won its operation license. But the plant has never produced a watt power. Governor Mario Cuomo, an opponent of a Shoreham start-up, used his power to force New York’s public-utilities commission to accept the following settlement: the power company could pass the cost of Shoreham along to its consumers only if it agreed not to operate the plant. Today, a perfectly good facility, capable of servicing hundreds of thousands of homes, sits rusting.
The greatest fear of nuclear power opponents has always been a reactor “meltdown”. Today, the chances of a meltdown that would threaten U.S. public health are very little. But to even further reduce the possibility, engineers are testing new reactors that rely not on human judgment to shut them down but on the laws of nature. Now General Electric is already building two advanced reactors in Japan. But don't expect them even on U.S. shores unless things change in Washington.
The procedure for licensing nuclear power plants is a bad dream. Any time during, or even after, construction, an objection by any group or individual can bring everything to a stop while the matter is investigated or taken to court. Meanwhile, the builder must add nice–but–not–necessary improvements, some of which force him to knock down walls and start over. In every case when a plant has been opposed, the Nuclear Regulation Commission has ultimately granted a license to construct or operate. But the victory often costs so much that the utility ends up abandoning the plant anyway.
A case in point is the Shoreham plant on New York's Long Island. Shoreham was a virtual twin to the Millstone plant in Connecticut, both ordered in the mid-60s. Millstone, completed for ＄101 million, has been generating electricity for two decades. Shoreham, however, was singled out by antinuclear activists who, by sending in endless protests, drove the cost over $5 billion and delayed its use for many years.
Shoreham finally won its operation license. But the plant has never produced a watt power. Governor Mario Cuomo, an opponent of a Shoreham start-up, used his power to force New York’s public-utilities commission to accept the following settlement: the power company could pass the cost of Shoreham along to its consumers only if it agreed not to operate the plant. Today, a perfectly good facility, capable of servicing hundreds of thousands of homes, sits rusting.
已赞过
已踩过<
评论
收起
你对这个回答的评价是？
更多回答（1）
推荐律师服务：
若未解决您的问题，请您详细描述您的问题，通过百度律临进行免费专业咨询
