跟讀練習: IASNR 2022 Conference Presentation - 通過影片學習英語口語

選擇練習模式

每種模式都會開啟全屏練習室。

117 句

如果句子過短或過長，請點選 Edit 進行調整。

Hi, my name is Chad McGuire, and this is my presentation on an analysis of sulfur emission reductions in the United States between 1990

and 2014 using a disproportionality framework.

In terms of an overview, uh, There is a regulatory natural experiment in sulfur emissions in the United States that we can look at,

and it began in 1990 when the United States federal government passed the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990.

And the regulatory mechanism that creates this natural experiment is the cap and trade program.

Cap and trade has been used in a number of ways.

globally by different governments, but here in the United States in particular, cap and trade was the main mechanism that was used in the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments.

And as a matter of using that cap and trade framework, we can review reductions over time.

between high and low socioeconomic status communities.

So using the cap and trade scenario, we can look at the effect of cap and trade.

in terms of its

proportionality or disproportionality between communities and what that means quite simply is

that as we see the cap

and trade play itself out over time since 1990 we can

look at areas where emission levels of certain particular sulfur as an example of a pollutant

that has an impact on human well -being we can look at those the numbers of the proportions

of sulfur emissions over time since 1990

and we can see relatively speaking where they diminished

and where they might not have diminished as quickly in certain communities so we can look for evidence of disproportionality so

Operational characteristics are we can look for, for example, for the socio -economic status communities, higher unemployment, lower educational attainment,

higher consumption of means tested public services and offering greater demographic diversity.

These characteristics are the things

that we would look at to determine low socio -economic status communities

when we're looking at the relative changes in sulfur emissions from the cap and trade program between different geographic regions.

And disproportionality itself, we can operationally or operationally defined as evidence of distributional effects of environmental policies.

So where we see some change, some variance in reductions, let's call that, reductions of sulfur emissions over time.

So for cap and trade in particular, the cap, we can look at as a government mandate and then the trade market forces.

So we have the opportunity for distributional effects because the cap part is a government mandate.

That's a requirement.

So we cap total amounts of emissions, but then the trade can allow us to see how those changes,

those reductions as the cap reduces total emissions, where there might be changes in one area versus another.

You might actually see increases in some areas where you see substantial reductions in others.

And then you'd look at what those areas look like, what that community looks like, and whether or not it shows signs of,

as we've defined operationally here, low socioeconomic status.

Michael Shachm: And so, as a matter of overall CAP is reduced government function, but what is the distribution of emissions and trading phase over time between socio economic status communities.

- Yeah.

For the purposes of the study, in particular.

located in Massachusetts and so looked at Massachusetts communities instead of a nationwide

because there's too much variance say between states it's too difficult

so we looked at communities at the county level

and then specific communities largest emitters within counties so we compared those counties

and the communities within those counties

and Massachusetts as a way to try to determine disproportionality the big questions what factors may be influencing the observance or

What factors might be influencing it?

What policy implications arise from this analysis?

And in terms of the research focus framework questions that we have derived from previous work, Collins, Munos, and Zsa Zsa in particular,

whether the producer disproportionality are present across the study area.

So do we find disproportionality at all between these Massachusetts communities, these let's call them county level communities.

And if disproportionality are found, what is the demographic makeup of those communities, and are they consistent?

So if we do find disproportionality between communities, How do those communities look from a demographic standpoint?

In terms of data and results, so here we have a table that we derived from looking at the different sulfur emissions,

and these are the years in which we can find changes

and new updates in terms of the United States Environmental Protection Agency national emissions inventory.

So these are the years that we can find between 1990 and 2014 where we're given these specific particular changes.

What we find is that in Massachusetts, if you look, you can see that in 1990, these are in the millions, so it's 2 .33 million.

And we see a reduction down to 3544 metric tons, which is significant.

So we see an overall significant reduction.

The cap and trade program was very effective in reducing between 1990 and 2014 the amount of sulfur overall in Massachusetts. than others.

And so we can look at those counties

and make a determination of the levels of reduction from these periods of time from 1990 to 1996,

from 1996, 1997, so on and so forth, and look at how those reductions.

We can see there were substantial overall reductions between 1990 and 2014,

but the question is, what does the path look like between these years where the measurements were made, and what does the path look like in relationship to that?

relating these counties to what we have identified as Bristol County

as our low socioeconomic status community these are the five counties within Massachusetts

that have the largest relatively large levels we excluded Suffolk County for various reasons

but it was basically done within between 1990 and 1996 but

which had the largest levels and we can see distribution patterns

and compare them honestly between each other of these five counties over the period of time

The reason Bristol County is chosen as our low socioeconomic status or the community, the relative community with disproportionality is because relative to the other,

counties as you can see here in the scatter plots you

can see the other counties bristol county shows relative to its amount of emissions here the tons of sulfur emissions

and we can look at a certain demographics that we're able to get which includes population unemployment rate percent below poverty

and percent of high school graduate or higher.

We see the Bristol County basically contains these demographic indicators in terms of overall poverty level,

overall percentage relative to the other counties.

Bristol County has higher emissions, relative to the other counties, and it tends to be,

it tends to have higher unemployment rates and lower education rates, the things that you would indicate to be a low socioeconomic status community in relationship to these other areas.

So that's why Bristol County ends up being our county of choice.

And so when we sort of look at these distribution patterns over time of those years that we discussed,

1990, 96, 97, so these years where the EPA inventory looked at the sulfur emissions, we can see we have substantial reductions,

relatively speaking, and including Bristol County, which I think, excuse me, which we can see here in the yellow Bristol County's reductions.

here.

So effectively what's happening is that the burden, if you think about it this way, as you're reducing sulfur emissions, if you're not doing technological advances,

if you're not going to put in expensive scrubbers to remove the sulfur, you're probably going to start shutting down and transitioning from coal to other methods of generating electricity,

where most of the sulfur emissions come from is the burning of coal.

And so what's happening is the other counties that That's Bristol County.

They're either shutting down or they're reducing pretty substantially within about a decade or so,

and Bristol County is taking the sort of brunt of that.

So if there's a need for still generating electricity using coal, relatively speaking, a cheap version for the state.

writ large that you're going to see Bristol County.

The evidence shows that Bristol County did not have the same rates in between these years in particular, the same rates of reductions.

And you can see that

if you look at Massachusetts here in the green relative to Massachusetts reductions relative to Bristol County, its reductions.

You see again, there's this burden

that Bristol County seems to be taking on relative to the

rest of the state in terms of maintaining a certain level of emissions.

What that means effectively if we look at this is that the cap and trade can be effective at pollution reduction.

It certainly was in Massachusetts.

100

It was nationally, you know, in terms of reducing emissions significantly sulfur, which carries all kinds of important implications,

101

but cap sets mandatory target.

102

which is important because you can lower the cap every year, every period of time.

103

And then the trade allows for important market incentives and choice.

104

So it allows for a lot of room in terms of how generators, those that burn sulfur, coal, that contain sulfur, how they're going to meet that objective.

105

But the process is far from equal.

106

And that's what the evidence shows us in this study.

107

So the evidence is the burden of reduction tends to fall disproportionately on marginalized communities.

108

In our case, Bristol County bore most of the burden of reducing.

109

It same reduction, the same levels of reduction as the other communities.

110

And so that's an important point for the trade portion, at least, because it's not equal amongst communities.

111

And so we must understand this reality when we're thinking about policy design and implementation.

112

We must look beyond the ultimate goals and see how the process of obtaining those goals, what happens along the way.

113

And that's really important to think about from a policy standpoint when we thinking about the role of environmental policies.

114

That's all.

115

I hope you enjoyed.

116

Thank you very much.

117

Thank you.

下載應用

流利口語所需的一切

AI 發音評分逐句打分

音標練習掌握每個音

詞彙學習建立你的詞庫

詞彙遊戲邊玩邊學

掃碼

Download on theApp Store Get it onGoogle Play

FOR YOU

本課的詞彙與口語要點

這節 C1 級別的口語課以影片“IASNR 2022 Conference Presentation”為素材。影片中反覆出現的詞有：reduction, emission, cap, communities, county。這段影片共有 117 個句子、1669 個單詞可供跟讀。講話部分時長為 11:06。說話人語速自然，每分鐘約 150 個詞，接近日常對話。 83% 的單詞屬於英語最常用的 3,000 詞，其餘的詞建議在練習前先學一下。

影片中的重點詞彙

影片中最難的 15 個單詞，附發音和釋義：

單詞	發音	釋義
emission 名詞	/ɪˈmɪʃ.ən/	排放
sulfur 名詞	/ˈsʌl.fə/	硫, 硫黃
standpoint 名詞	/ˈstændpɔɪnt/	立場 /立場, 觀點 /觀點
mandate 名詞	/ˈmændeɪ̯t/	授權 /授權, 權利 /權利
characteristic 名詞	/ˌkæɹ(ə)ktəˈɹɪstɪk/	特性, 特質 /特質
attainment 名詞	/əˈteɪnmənt/	達到 /達到
marginalize 動詞	/ˈmɑɹdʒɪnəlaɪz/	邊緣化 /邊緣化
pollutant 名詞	/pəˈl(j)uːtənt/	汙染物
scatter 動詞	/ˈskætɚ/	散佈 /散佈
metric 形容詞	/ˈmɛt.ɹɪk/	公制
indicator 名詞	/ˈɪn.dɪˌkeɪ.tə(ɹ)/	指示符
arise 動詞	/əˈɹaɪz/	起來 /起來, 產生 /產生
generator 名詞	/ˈdʒɛnəɹeɪtə(ɹ)/	發電機 /發電機
substantially 副詞		實貭上地 /實貭上地
incentive 名詞	/ɪnˈsɛntɪv/	刺激, 誘因 /誘因

影片中出現的短語動詞

單詞	釋義
end up 動詞	到達

影片中的語法

說話人最常用的結構，並附上影片中的原話：

結構	影片中的用法
現在完成時 have/has + 過去分詞 — 過去發生但與現在仍有關聯的事	has been · we've defined · have derived
被動語態 be + 過去分詞 — 強調發生了什麼，而不是誰做的	is reduced · are found · were made

需要注意的發音

說話人用了 14 次縮略和弱讀形式，例如 you're, we're, they're。請按聽到的簡短形式來說。

“sh” 和 “zh” 音: emission /ɪˈmɪʃ.ən/, diminish /dɪˈmɪnɪʃ/, distributional /ˌdɪs.tɹəˈbjuː.ʃə.nəl/, implication /ˌɪmpləˈkeɪʃən/, disproportionately /ˈdɪs.pɹəˌpɔɹ.ʃən.ət.li/
長單詞——注意重音位置: demographic /ˌdɛm.əˈɡɹæf.ɪk/, distributional /ˌdɪs.tɹəˈbjuː.ʃə.nəl/, implication /ˌɪmpləˈkeɪʃən/, characteristic /ˌkæɹ(ə)ktəˈɹɪstɪk/, disproportionately /ˈdɪs.pɹəˌpɔɹ.ʃən.ət.li/

中文母語者容易讀錯的音：

/v/ — 不要讀成 /w/，上齒輕觸下唇: variance /ˈvæɹ.i.əns/, derive /dɪˈɹaɪv/, observance /əbˈzɝvəns/, incentive /ɪnˈsɛntɪv/
詞尾子音 — 要讀清楚，後面不要加母音: demographic /ˌdɛm.əˈɡɹæf.ɪk/, diminish /dɪˈmɪnɪʃ/, variance /ˈvæɹ.i.əns/, derive /dɪˈɹaɪv/, standpoint /ˈstændpɔɪnt/
/r/ 和 /l/ 的區別: distributional /ˌdɪs.tɹəˈbjuː.ʃə.nəl/, disproportionately /ˈdɪs.pɹəˌpɔɹ.ʃən.ət.li/, marginalize /ˈmɑɹdʒɪnəlaɪz/, proportionality /pɹəpɔɹʃəˈnæləti/

如何用這段影片練習

先完整聽一遍影片，不要開口，記下不認識的單詞。
先用 0.75 倍速逐句跟讀，熟練之後再回到正常速度。
錄下自己的聲音並與原聲對比，特別注意 emission, sulfur, standpoint 這類單詞。

什麼是跟讀法？

跟讀法 (Shadowing) 是一種有科學依據的語言學習技巧，最初開發用於專業口譯員的培訓，並由多語言者Alexander Arguelles博士普及。這個方法簡單而強大：您在聽英語母語原聲的同時立即大聲重複——就像是一個延遲1-2秒緊跟說話者的影子。與被動聽力或語法練習不同，跟讀法強迫您的大腦和口腔肌肉同時處理並模模擬實的講話模式。研究表明它能顯著提高發音準確性，語調，節奏，連讀，聽力理解和口語流利度——使其成為雅思口語備考和真實英語交流最有效的方法之一。

影子跟讀法: 閱讀完整分步指南 →

跟讀練習: IASNR 2022 Conference Presentation - 通過影片學習英語口語

選擇練習模式

下載應用

推薦影片

English vocabulary in use Advanced Unit 2

Leonardo DiCaprio (UN Messenger of Peace) at the opening of Climate Summit 2014

2014 Three Minute Thesis winning presentation by Emily Johnston

Rep. AOC on BUSES Act: "I'm requesting for us to preserve our freedom to protect our children."

Why safeguard ICH? Answers from Chile

What Happens When Science Clashes with the Public?: Crash Course Scientific Thinking #7

The use of soil to reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere | IELTS LISTENING TEST | SECTION-4

Welcome to UC San Diego's Scripps Institution of Oceanography

Sec Growth DataScience staff meeting Sep 14 2022

Nature Is Speaking: Joan Chen is Sky | Conservation International (CI)

THB Reform is Fit to Govern - Rachel Millward - Opp

44 Audio Track