(Reuters) - A U.N. climate deal due to be agreed in Copenhagen at talks from December 7-18 may fall short of a legally binding(有約束力的) agreement. If Copenhagen fails to live up to hopes of a strong agreement to slow global warming, what are the reasons and who risks blame? The following are some of the candidates:

● Decline in economy distracted(分散) focus from climate change after the world agreed in Bali, Indonesia, in 2007 to work out a new U.N. agreement by December 2009. Rich nations have put billions of dollars into green growth as part of recovery packages but, when unemployment at home is high, find it hard to promise extra money for developing countries. The slowdown in industrial output means a brief fix -- greenhouse gas emissions(排放) are likely to fall by as much as 3 percent this year.

● Many delegates at U.N. talks have given up hope that the United States, the number two emitter after China, will agree legislation(立法, 法律) to limit carbon emissions before Copenhagen. The US is the only industrialized nation outside the Kyoto Protocol(京都協(xié)議書) for cutting greenhouse emissions until 2012. Many countries welcomed President Barack Obama's promises of doing more to fight climate change when he took office in January but hoped for swifter action.

● Developing nations accuse the rich of repeatedly failing to keep promises of more aid. Few developed countries live up to a target agreed by the U.N. General Assembly in 1970 to give 0.7 percent of their gross domestic product in development aid. Other plans, such as the Agenda 21 environmental development plan agreed in 1992, have fallen short.

● Most rich nations are promising cuts in greenhouse gas emissions well short of the 25-40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, which are needed to avoid the worst of climate change. Overall cuts promised by developed nations total between 11 and 15 percent. Best offers by countries including Japan, the European Union, Australia and Norway would reach the range.

● More than 90 percent of the growth in emissions between now and 2030 is set to come from developing nations -- with almost 50 percent from China alone, U.S. climate envoy Todd Stern said this week. "No country holds the fate of the earth more in its hands than China. Not one," he said. China and India say they are slowing the growth of emissions but raising living standards is more important. So burning more energy is unavoidable -- as industrialized nations have done for 200 years.

● 2008 was the 10th warmest year since records began in the mid-19th century. The warmest was 1998, when a strong El Nino event in the eastern Pacific disrupted(使混亂) weather worldwide. That has led some to argue that global warming is slowing even though the U.N.'s WMO(世界氣象組織) says a long-term warming trend is unchanged.

● People have been slow in changing lifestyles to use less carbon. Simple choices like taking more public transport, using less heating or air conditioning, even changing light bulbs can help if millions of people act.

Who's to blame if U.N. climate deal falls short?

The volunteers were kept busy d________ food and drinks to the people affected by the earthquakes.

You might think body language is universal. After all, we're the same species, right? But basics like what is considered a polite greeting and definitions of "personal space" vary widely from culture to culture. Americans, for instance, are considered rather reserved in the way they greet friends, and they define personal space more broadly than most other cultures. Knowing how another culture's basic body language differs from yours may be of use next time you travel internationally.

Mind how you meet and greet. Americans and Canadians, male and female, tend to greet each other with a nice firm handshake. In Asian countries, the polite form of greeting is to bow, and the lower you bow, the deeper respect you have for the person you are bowing to. In Spain, Portugal, Italy and Eastern Europe, men kiss each other on the cheek.

Be careful about eye contact. In America, intermittent(斷斷續(xù)續(xù)的) eye contact is preferable in a conversation--unless it's someone you care deeply for. In Middle Eastern countries, intense prolonged(持久的) eye contact is the norm, and the person you're speaking with will move very close to you to maintain it. The Japanese, on the other hand, consider it an invasion of privacy, and rarely look another person in the eye.

Americans, in general, smile when they meet or greet someone. Koreans, however, think it's rude for adults to smile in public--to them, smiling in public is a sign of embarrassment.

Don't point. Most Americans think nothing of pointing at an object or another person. Native Americans consider it extremely rude to point with a finger, and instead they point with their chin. It's also rude to point with a finger in China; the polite alternative is to use the whole hand, palm facing up.

Give the right amount of space. In Asian cultures, particularly China, the concept of personal space (generally defined in America as a three-to-four-foot circle for casual and business acquaintances) is nearly nonexistent. Strangers regularly touch bodies when standing in line for, say, movie tickets. People in Scandinavian countries, on the other hand, need more personal space than we do.

Title: How to (71)_______ Body Language in Different Cultures

Do we need an “Ivy League”?

China may soon have its own “Ivy League”, with a union of top universities.

The term originally referred to an athletic conference of eight top universities in the northeastern US. The Chinese version, which was officially started in mid-October, consists of nine famous universities, including Peking, Tsinghua, Zhejiang and Fudan. The union is supposed to result in student exchange programs, recognition of academic achievements, and other joint programs.

The news of this Chinese “Ivy League” has received mixed responses from the public and press. Some negative critics have dismissed it as yet another example of the wishful copying of international practices without fully understanding them. Others say that the “Ivy League” is not necessary but that the union is a good idea, one that could promote academic development.

So what’s your opinion on a Chinese “Ivy League”? Do we need one?

Yes. Ivy League or not, nine of China’s best universities cooperating is a good thing.

These universities combining resources could create a better environment for students and for research. It could also save a lot of time and resources because it would mean fewer unnecessary investments for some of the universities.

Allowing students to move to or have exchanges with other universities could broaden their horizons, improve their social skills and create more employment opportunities. The results could be more important than lessons and achievements.

The term “Ivy League” carries a sense of academic excellence, tradition and reputation. If borrowing such a term could encourage students’ and professors’ mental state and improve Chinese higher education, then there’s no reason not to do it.

No. Universities should do some work on increasing cooperation instead of copying an “Ivy League” model.

Many Chinese universities already have such cooperation with each other. If this cooperation were associated with the “Ivy League”, it would just distract (分散) attention and resources and have a negative effect.

These Chinese universities are all state-run and most get their funding from the government. They’re quite similar to each other in many ways and more cooperation wouldn’t bring about as much potential ability as between , say, public and private, or Chinese and foreign universities.

China should find its own way to develop world-class universities instead of by copying some foreign practices. We have our own unique conditions and foreign lessons often don’t apply well here.

請(qǐng)認(rèn)真閱讀下列短文，并根據(jù)所讀內(nèi)容在文章后表格中的空格里填入最恰當(dāng)?shù)膯卧~。注意：每空1個(gè)單詞。

A big part of being an effective team member is being a good listener, so listening carefully is very important. Do you think your listening skills need improving? Simply remember the ladder to become a better listener.

Look at the person who is speaking to you. If you make eye contact, the speaker feels like he has your undivided attention. If an individual comes into your office to talk, stop what you are doing. When you continue typing or staring at your computer screen, the person talking to you feels insignificant.

Ask questions. This shows you’re interested and that you are hearing what he is saying.

Don’t interrupt. When you interrupt, the speaker feels you’re not interested in what he is saying and will be frustrated(沮喪的) by the inability to finish a complete thought. Take the time to listen---just relax and open your ears!

Don’t change the subject. Changing the subject indicates that your mind is elsewhere. It shows you’re not concentrating on what’s being said at that moment, and this makes the speaker feel uncomfortable. If you change the subject, the speaker could also get the impression that you’re avoiding the topic and may be hesitant to bring it up again.

Empathize(有同感). When someone shares information with you, put yourself in his shoes. Doing this will allow the two of you to discover solutions more easily and will also help you appreciate a perspective(觀點(diǎn)) different from you own.

Respond verbally(口頭地) and non-verbally. Using an enthusiastic tone shows you’re interested in what the speaker is saying. Smiling helps too! Avoid crossing your arms since this can be interpreted(解釋) as being closed off. If you’re speaking with someone who’s sitting, you should sit too. Standing over someone is too official and may make the other person feel uncomfortable.

If you are unsure whether you are a good listener or not, simply take the following test. In your next meeting or conversation, make a mental note, even better, write down on a piece of paper the number of times you interrupt. The fewer marks there are on your paper, the better listener you are! This seems like a silly test, but you may be surprised by the quantity of marks on your paper. After all, the worst listeners usually aren’t aware that their listening skills need some attention or improvement.

Nowadays, more and more people are using email, but sometimes we use it too much or use it inappropriately. To get the most out of email we need to use it carefully and sensibly. These are some simple tips to help you make a better use of email.

It is good to have separate email accounts for separate purposes. For example, you may have one for business and one for social activities. This means you can check the personal email in the evening without having to think about business. If you see an important message from your boss, it could ruin your weekend or evening. After all, most people want to relax themselves and get away from work at the end of the day. Don't allow email to make you a slave to work. Some people feel it is inconvenient to check 2 different email accounts. But the relative inconvenience is easily outweighed by the benefits.

Many people ignore the title of an email. If the subject changes don’t keep using an old “re: irrelevant title.” A good title increases the chance that people will actually read your email rather than just leaving it for later. A bad title may even get deleted as spam.(垃圾郵件)

Emails can be brief and to the point. If the message has to be long, make sure it is broken up into different sections, which are easy to read. But, generally you should aim to keep it less than 5 sentences. This is good for both the writer and the reader.

If somebody sends some important documents, files or message, make sure you, at least, acknowledge their receipt(接收). Otherwise they may be uncertain that you’ve got them. It doesn't have to be long; it can be quite short.

If you find yourself sending similar answers to many people, write a draft message and save it in your drafts folder (or write it in Word). You can use this standard response for emailing many people. Don’t forget to personalize it by adding their names.

Having a signature looks professional and saves typing the same information. Remember people may wish to contact you through other ways. So make sure you have a phone number and address in your email. If relevant, add any qualifications and websites that you have. This gives people a chance to find out more about you.

When Carla Fisher and her husband announced plans to travel the globe with their young daughters for a year, some friends called them crazy.

    Seven years later, with wonderful memories and a book documenting their world travel, the Fishers now seem like global trailblazers (先驅(qū)者).

    “It’s really encouraging to hear that many other people want to educate their kids in that manner,” said Fisher.

Some parents are trying to raise knowledgeable and open-minded “world citizens”. Others want to give their children the skills they’ll need to compete globally.

“There is a huge amount of interest in spending time abroad at all stages of life and increasingly, as a family with children,” said Maya Frost, author of “The New Global Student…”. She knows American families in every corner of the globe who have made that choice.

    “There’s so much more to education than school,” said Tessa Hill, who recently returned to her Houston-area home, after driving her family across North and Central America and Europe in a motor home for 13 months. “World travel is an education in people, cultures, language, travel skills, street smarts and in how lucky we are to live in the United States.”

    When Hill and her husband began considering extended global travel, their middle child, Charles, 13, was surprised. “My first reaction was ‘well, are we really going to do this?’” Charles said. “But it did sound like great fun.”

    Charles said missing his friends was the hardest part. He stayed in touch via e-mail and made some new friends along the way, playing soccer with kids in France and learning about rugby from youths in Ireland.

“I’d definitely recommend this to other kids,” Charles said. “It was such a great opportunity to see different countries and learn geography a different way.”

To make re-entry smoother, most school officials prefer that families work out an educational plan before they leave town.

“It sounds out-of-date, but it really opens up your mind and your eyes to the world,” said Robbin Goodman, 17, a senior student who spent his junior year skateboarding across Beijing, China, when he wasn’t studying Chinese history and other core subjects.

Had he not already taken a school-sponsored spring break trip with his mom to China in 2007, Robbin said he probably would not have been able to convince his parents to let him go alone for a year. “I knew I would learn Chinese and all that, but my goal was to have a great time,” Robbin said. 

“The biggest problem for those seriously considering going abroad is dealing with those who are against the idea,” said Frost.

“They gain the ability to take risks and to have confidence in themselves,” said Liz Pearlstein, founder of a global education consulting firm. “When we came home from London, my daughter, who had been painfully shy before we left, said ‘Mom, now I know there’s nothing I can’t do.’”

No one knows exactly how many American families are choosing the global education path,

but global education consultants say a growing number of parents are traveling for a year or more with their children.

Introduction to anger

Anger is a natural reaction which comes out when we feel that we have not been given a fair treatment. The positive side of this negative emotion is that it has helped us to evolve as humans and cope in a better manner with our surroundings. However, it tends to become a problem when we fail to control it. Many a time it happens that your anger has hurt others or has spoiled one of your relationships for which you regret later. It has some bad effects on the health, too.

We should control anger so that it does not cause harm to us or to those around us whom we love. One of the best ways to control anger is to get help from others. If you feel that you are unable to manage your anger, it can make you more upset. So tell someone that is close to you, a friend or a family member, about your problem. When you discuss a matter with others, there is a better chance of finding a solution to your problem. Besides, there are no better stress relievers than humor. When you feel that it is because of stress that your anger is becoming unmanageable, you can use humor. It can help you look at difficult things in a lighter way and you will feel better about the things around you.

    Anger tends to make us have a lot of negative thoughts. Therefore, we have to change the negative thoughts into positive ones. For this you have to first refuse all the negative thoughts that are in your mind one by one. This can be done with a lot of practice. Once you are successful in that, you have to maintain your focus only on the positive things of life.

Meditation (冥想) is an excellent anger management technique. In addition, what we do is disconnect ourselves from the outer world and focus all our attention into the inner world. This helps us develop a sense of controlling our thoughts that tend to cause anger.

Could your cellphone give you cancer? Whether it could or not, some people are worrying about the possibility that phones, powerlines and wi-fi (路由器) could be responsible for a range of illnesses, from rashes to brain tumours.

For example, Camilla Rees, 48, a former investment banker in the US, moved out of her apartment in San Francisco because of the radiation coming from next door. Rees told the Los Angeles Times that when her neighbors moved in and installed a wi-fi router she lost her ability to think clearly. “I would wake up dizzy in the morning. I’d fall to the floor. I had to leave to escape that nightmare,” she said. Since then, she’s been on a campaign against low-level electromagnetic fields, or EMFs (低頻電磁場(chǎng)).

And she’s not alone. Millions of people say they suffer from headaches, depression, nausea and rashes when they’re too close to cellphones or other sources of EMFs.

Although the World Health Organization has officially declared that EMFs seem to pose little threat, governments are still concerned. In fact, last April, the European Parliament called for countries to take steps to reduce exposure to EMFs. The city of San Francisco and the state of Maine are currently considering requiring cancer-warning labels on cellphones.

If these fears are reasonable, then perhaps we should all be worried about the amount of time we spend talking on our phones or plugging into wi-fi hotpots.

Some say there is evidence to support the growing anxieties. David Carpenter, a professor of environmental health sciences at the University at Albany, in New York, thinks there’s a greater than 95% chance that power lines can cause childhood leukemia. Also there’s a greater than 90% chance that cellphones can cause brain tumours.

But others believe these concerns are unreasonable paranoia (猜疑). Dr Martha Linet, the head of radiation epidemiology at the US National Cancer Institute, has looked at the same research as Carpenter but has reached a different conclusion. “I don’t support warning labels for cellphones,” said Linet. “We don't have the evidence that there’s much danger.”

Studies so far suggest a weak connection between EMFs and illness — so weak that it might not exist at all. A multinational investigation of cellphones and brain cancer, in 13 countries outside the US, has been underway for several years. It’s funded in part by the European Union, in part by a cellphone industry group.

According to Robert Park, a professor of physics at the University of Maryland in the US, the magnetic waves aren’t nearly powerful enough to break apart DNA, which is how known threats, such as UV rays and X-rays, cause cancer.

Perhaps it’s just psychological. Some experts find that the electro-sensitivity syndrome seems to be similar to chemical sensitivity syndrome, which is a condition that’s considered to be psychological.

Whether EMFs are harmful or not, a break in the countryside, without the cellphone, would probably be good for all of us.

Waste to Energy—JUST BURN IT!

WHY BURN WASTE?

    Waste-to-energy plants generate (產(chǎn)生) enough electricity to supply 2.4 million households in the US. But, providing electricity is not the major advantage of waste-to-energy plants. In fact, it costs more to generate electricity at a waste-to-energy plant than it does at a coal, nuclear, or hydropower plant. 

The major advantage of burning waste is that it considerably reduces the amount of trash going to landfills. The average American produces more than 1,600 pounds of waste a year. If all this waste were landfilled, it would take more than two cubic yards of landfill space. That’s the volume of a box three feet long, three feet wide, and six feet high. If that waste were burned, the ashes would fit into a box three feet long, three feet wide, but only nine inches high!

Some communities in the Northeast may be running out of land for new landfills. And, since most people don’t want landfills in their backyards, it has become more difficult to obtain permits to build new landfills. Taking the country as a whole, the United States has plenty of open space, of course, but it is expensive to transport garbage a long distance to put it into a landfill.

TO BURN OR NOT TO BURN?

 Some people are concerned that burning garbage may harm the environment. Like coal plants, waste-to-energy plants produce air pollution when the fuel is burned to produce steam or electricity. Burning garbage releases the chemicals and substances found in the waste. Some chemicals can be a threat to people, the environment, or both, if they are not properly controlled.

Some critics of waste-to-energy plants are afraid that burning waste will hamper (妨礙，阻礙) recycling programs. If everyone sends their trash to a waste-to-energy plant, they say, there will be little motive to recycle. Several states have considered or are considering banning waste-to-energy plants unless recycling programs are in place. Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York City have delayed new waste-to-energy plants, hoping to increase the level of recycling first.

So, what’s the real story? Can recycling and burning waste coexist? At first glance, recycling and waste-to-energy seem to be at odds (不一致), but they can actually complement (彌補(bǔ)) each other. That’s because it makes good sense to recycle some materials, and better sense to burn others.

Let’s look at aluminum, for example. Aluminum mineral is so expensive to mine that recycling aluminum more than pays for itself. Burning it produces no energy. So clearly, aluminum is valuable to recycle and not useful to burn.  

Paper, on the other hand, can either be burned or recycled—it all depends on the price the used paper will bring.

Plastics are another matter. Because plastics are made from petroleum and natural gas, they are excellent sources of energy for waste-to-energy plants. This is especially true since plastics are not as easy to recycle as steel, aluminum, or paper. Plastics almost always have to be hand sorted and making a product from recycled plastics may cost more than making it from new materials. 

To burn or not to burn is not really the question. We should use both recycling and waste-to-energy as alternatives to landfilling.

Waste to Energy—JUST BURN IT!