中国塑协聚氨酯制品专委会fsiblog.desi

USA: Representatives from 22 US conservative groups have signed a letter urging President Trump not to submit the Kigali Amendment to phase down HFCs to the Senate for ratification.

美国：22个美国保守组织的代表签署了一封信敦促川普总结不要提交参议院批准HFC削减的基加利协议。

The letter, sent yesterday, was signed by 24 representatives from 22 conservative industry, consumer, and science organisations, including the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) and Heritage Action. The signers argue that the Kigali Amendment would do far more economic harm than environmental good.

昨天呈送的这封信由来自22个保守行业、消费业和商业组织的24名代表联合签署，包括竞争企业协会（CEI）和美国遗产行动组织。签署人认为基加利协议对经济的危害要远大于环境的好处。

The US conservative right appears to be split over the Kigali Amendment. Recent weeks have seen similar letters from 13 Republican senators and a similar conservative group urging Trump to back the agreement.

美国右翼保守组织似乎对基加利协议存有分歧，近几周，同样一封由13个共和党议员和类似的保守组织则敦促川普支持基加利协议。

The new protagonists claim that the Kigali Amendment would do far more economic harm than environmental good and that Congress should be spending its time working to cut red tape, not add to it.

这些人声称基加利协议对经济的危害远大于环境的好处，国会应该减少繁文缛节而不是增加。

The letter maintains that the environmental benefits of replacing HFCs are “minimal at best”.  It says that “most” studies have concluded that fully implementing the Kigali Amendment would reduce the global mean temperature by “an unmeasurable amount” by 2050.

邮件认为替代HFC对环境的好处是有限的，大部分研究表明即使完全实施基加利协议对2050年全球平均气温的下降也是不可测的。

“The Kigali Amendment would require Americans to eventually replace air conditioning and refrigeration units with more expensive alternatives,” commented director of CEI’s Center for Energy and Environment Myron Ebell. “This will benefit several corporations that make the new, more expensive chemicals and units that use them, but it will raise costs for households, businesses, and motorists.”

“基加利修正案要求美国人最终要用更昂贵的替代品替代空调和制冷单元中的制冷剂”，CEI的能源与环境中心的负责人Myron Ebell说到，“这只会让那些生产新型的、价格更高制冷剂的企业和使用这些制冷剂的公司有利，但它会提高家庭、商业和汽车主的成本。

However, the groups argue that they are not against the adoption of HFOs but that consumers and businesses rather than governments or the United Nations should be able to decide if and when to replace HFCs with HFOs.

但是，该组织认为他们并不反对应用HFOs，应该由消费者和商业主而不是政府或联合国来决定是否和什么时候用HFOs来替代HFCs。

“This kind of overregulation threatens the progress the Trump administration has made in boosting the economy, lowering unemployment, supporting investment, and ultimately increasing family incomes,” added Ebell.

Ebell补充到：”这种过度监管行为将会对川普政府的经济兴旺、降低失业率和投资产生危害，最终提高家庭成本”。

摘自：新材料参考