The Cancún Summit on Climate Change in 2010 (pp. 40–42)
1
Individual solutions
2
Arguments for why the summit was a
success
Arguments for why the summit “falls
short of saving the planet”
Pledges that were made the year before are now
formal.
Pledges are not legally binding.
Developing countries also agreed to try to cut
emissions in the future.
No specific pledges were made.
A climate green fund was agreed upon, i.e.
developed countries agreed to transfer money to
the developing world.
It was not specified how much money will
go into this fund.
Promise to raise $100bn for climate aid was
repeated.
This promise is not part of the UN process
and is merely an aspiration.
UN deforestation scheme was given formal
backing.
Details about this scheme are still vague; it
might be a means for developed countries
to “offset” their emissions.
Decisions on the future of the Kyoto
Protocol were deferred until 2011.
Knowledge of clean technology is to be
transferred between countries.
There are no details on the money etc.
Countries agreed to have their emissions cuts
inspected.
It is not specified who will carry out the
inspections.
Japan and Russia announced that they
would not sign on to a second term of the
Kyoto Protocol unless China and the US
were also legally bound to action.
Failure to resolve difficult issues at Cancun
increases the risk that there will be no
second term of the Kyoto Protocol in 2011.
3
Individual solutions
An Inconvenient Truth about Gore (pp. 43–44)
1
Things Gore urges people to do to be
environmentally friendly
Things he does that show that he is not
environmentally friendly
Embrace a carbon-neutral lifestyle, i.e. switch to
compact fluorescent light bulbs; use a clothesline
instead of a dryer; drive a hybrid; use renewable
energy; cut back on consumption
Follow Gore’s example.
He and his wife Tipper live in 2 huge properties.
There is no evidence that he has signed up to
use green energy in either of his residences.
Holds large stock holdings in Occidental
Petroleum; the company supports oil drilling in
ecologically sensitive areas.
2
Introductory sentence “Gore has spoken” gives the impression that Gore is an authority and that
nobody must contradict him (this impression is later ridiculed when the readers learn about his
lifestyle). The use of adverbs and injections: “graciously” (l. 6); “better still”, (l. 9). The writer points
out that Gore presents himself as a role model (“responsible global citizens can follow Gore’s
example”, l. 9f.) and subsequently claims that “if Gore is the world’s role model for ecology, the
planet is doomed” (ll. 11f.). The verb “he claims” (l. 14) expresses the writer’s doubts about Gore’s
statements. The remark in brackets “In reality, Paramount Classics, the film’s distributor, pays this”
(ll. 16f.) and the sentence “for someone rallying the planet to pursue a path of extreme personal
sacrifice, Gore requires little from himself” (ll. 22–23) make it clear that the writer thinks Gore is a
hypocrite; He even says this explicitly: “The issue here is not simply Gore’s hypocrisy; it´s a
question of credibility” (ll. 43f.). The writer mentions that the Bush administration – in contrast to
Gore – had in fact signed up to use green energy (ll. 30ff.); this questions Gore’s credibility
because in his film he blames the Bush government for not being environmentally friendly; to
underline his opinion refers to these facts as “Talk about inconvenient truths” (ll. 35f.)
3
Two people at an airport parking, looking at a plane that is taking off; they seem puzzled. The text
says “Gore’s going to Oslo, Norway, to accept the Nobel Peace Prize for his courageous efforts to
reduce carbon dioxide emissions.” Just like the text, the cartoon criticizes Gore’s lifestyle, as
everybody knows that travelling by plane is not environmentally friendly.
4
Individual solutions
Bush on Climate Change (pp. 45–48)
1 b
2 a, e, g, h, i
3 a, b, c, e
4 Bush addresses the Americans.
He explains that the Kyoto Protocol is “fatally flawed” (l. 12), but ensures the Americans and the
rest of the world that this does not mean that his administration does not want to take responsibility
(ll. 78-81).
He expresses the importance to work together with the rest of the world and to take a leading role
in this process (ll. 16-18).
He emphasizes the fact that that his administration only makes commitments that they can keep;
thus indirectly blames other administrations for having made commitments that they cannot keep
and that are “unrealistic” (l. 71); (“This is an administration that will make commitments we can
keep, and keep commitments that we make”, ll. 105-107).
He repeats important words and phrases: “climate change”; “issue” (ll. 3-9).
He uses anaphora: “We do not know” (ll. 30-33) to underline that the real reasons for climate
change are still unknown and that therefore the Kyoto Protocol was not and will not be signed by
his administration; “We account for” and “we recognize” (ll. 51-54)
5 Individual solutions
Warning of Calamities and Hoping for Change in An Inconvenient
Truth (pp. 49–51)
1 Ab, Ba, Cc, Da
2 The writer of the review thinks that it is “the job of political leaders and policymakers” (l. 3) to deal
with such problems like global warming, but as they, according to the author, do not do anything to
solve the problem, one has to be grateful that filmmakers and retired politicians have taken
responsibility and that the film exists.
3 The review has an antithetical structure; first the author mentions arguments of people who
disapprove of the film and then he refutes them.
Example: The film should never have been made – one has to be grateful that it exists.
4 Individual solutions
Gore’s “Nine Inconvenient Untruths” (pp. 51–54)
1 Ac, Be, Ca, Dg, Ef, Fb, Gi, Hd, Ih
2 The judge claims that the film exaggerates and contains “untruths”.
1
The prediction of a sea-level rise of up to 20 feet is exaggerated
2
There is no evidence of evacuation because of flooding as a result of global warming as
suggested in the film
3
Gore claims that the “Ocean Conveyer” will shut down, however it is “very unlikely” that this
will happen in the near future
4
Although there is a connection between the concentration of CO2 and temperature, the graphs
that Gore shows do not prove what Gore asserts
5
The disappearance of snow on glaciers might as well be attributable to human-induced
climate change and not to global warming
6
The drying up of Lake Chad is more likely the result of population increase and over-grazing
than of climate change
7
There is insufficient evidence that the reason for Hurricane Katrina is global warming
8
Gore’s claim that polar bears have drowned because of global warming is wrong
9
Although it is correct that coral reefs are being bleached because of global warming, Gore
forgets to mention other factors like over-fishing and pollution
3 Individual solutions
4 Individual solutions
Writing a Resolution (pp. 56–57)
1
2
3
Individual solutions
Individual solutions
Individual solutions
I Need to Wake Up (p. 58)
1 In the song the speaker explains that he was “careless” (l. 4; l. 22) in his youth, that he had wild
dreams and that he ignored the “the distant rumblings” (l. 5), i.e. the problems that had been
noticeable, although taking action was not urgent, because the problems were not threatening
(“distant”). Now the speaker understands that he has to “wake up”, “to change” and to do
something about the problem, because he is “not alone” (l. 35), “not an island” (l. 34), i.e. he has to
take responsibility for others, too.
2 Rhetorical questions at the beginning – make the listeners think about their own attitude about
global warming.
Anaphora “I need” underlines the responsibility of the speaker (and the listener) to take action.
Slightly changed expression “I want to change” (l. 47) (instead of “I need to change”) underlines
that the speaker is not being forced to take action, but wants to.
The repetition of the adverb “now” (l. 16, l. 33, l. 46, l. 53) as a single word in the verses emphasizes
the urgency, because the rumblings are no longer “distant” (l. 5).
Verses: “I need to speak out” and “I need to shake up” make it clear that just leading an
environmentally friendly life is not enough, but that the speaker (and also the listeners) also have to
convince others
3
Individual solutions
4
Individual solutions
5
Individual solutions
Recent Ecological Disasters
Africa
1 Whereas there is precipitation in some parts of Africa, there are severe droughts in others.
2 Currently there is water scarcity in 14 African countries; this number will rise to 25 countries by
2025. 46% of Africa is threatened by desertification, which will put a great number of African people
at risk of hunger. Food prices will rise. Mosquitoes will thrive
3 An incubator is a device that is used to grow cells or cell cultures by maintaining ideal conditions. A
“threat incubator” in the context of the text is a situation that helps to breed “competition [and wars]
for land and livestock” (l. 22). Already now in northern Kenya “scores die every year in clashes over
watering holes and cattle” (ll. 23.)
Pakistan
1 14 million people were affected by the flood; 1600 killed. Illnesses like malaria, diarrhea and
gastroenteritis spread.
USA
1 As Bush was criticized for his response to Hurricane Katrina, now the US citizens closely observe
how Obama responds to the catastrophe in the Gulf.
2 He believes that “domestic oil production is an important part of [the US] overall strategy for energy
security” (ll. 12-13) and he planned to expand offshore drilling (ll. 28-29), however now the
administration wants to carefully review these decisions (ll. 16-19).
3 The government has to act correctly to make sure that the catastrophe does not provide “great
peril” for president Obama (ll. 20f.)