(单词翻译:单击)
And so environmentalists, I thought, were betraying the environment by stigmatizing nuclear power.
因此，我认为，环保主义者诋毁核能的行为是在背叛环境。
But I had to revise my view.
但我不得不改变我的观点。
Even without green opposition, nuclear power as we knew it would have fizzled—today’s environmentalists are not the main obstacle to its wide adoption.
即使没有环保人士的反对，我们所知的核能也会终成泡影——今天的环保主义者并不是大规模推广核能的主要障碍。
To be sure, environmentalists do not love nuclear power. They much prefer solar and wind.
诚然，环保主义者并不喜欢核能。他们更喜欢太阳能和风能。
But as Babbitt told me, “They’re all coming around. The attitudes in the environmental community are perceptibly changing.”
但正如巴比特告诉我的，“他们的意识正在苏醒。环保界的态度正在明显改变。”
Although only a handful of the mainline environmental organizations are openly “nuclear inclusive” (for example, the Nature Conservancy), many quietly accept that nuclear power can be part of the climate solution, and perhaps a necessary part.
虽然只有少数主流环保组织(如大自然保护协会)公开表示“包容核能”，但许多组织都悄然接受核能可以成为气候解决方案的一部分，也许是必要一部分的观点。
Because solar and wind power are inherently intermittent, they require other energy sources to even out peaks and dips.
由于太阳能与风能固有的非连续性，所以，它们需要其他能源来平衡高峰与低谷。
Natural gas and coal can do that, but of course the goal is to retire them.
天然气与煤炭可以作补充，但我们的目标当然是让它们退出市场。
Batteries can help but are much too expensive to rely on at present, and mining, manufacturing, and disposing of them entail their own environmental harms.
电池可以提供帮助，但目前依赖电池的成本太高，而且开采、制造与销毁电池也会对环境造成危害。
Also, nuclear power is the only efficient way to provide zero-carbon heat for high-temperature industrial processes such as steelmaking, which account for about a fifth of energy consumption.
核能是为高温工业过程（如炼钢）提供零碳热量的唯一有效途径，这一过程约占能源消耗的五分之一。
Perhaps most important, adding solar and wind capacity becomes more expensive and controversial as the most accessible land is used up.
也许最重要的是，随着大部分可开发的土地被用尽，增加太阳能与风能的产能的成本变得更高，且争议性也变得更大。
Nuclear energy’s footprint is extremely small.
核能占用的土地非常小。
Solar-energy production uses dozens of times as much land per unit of energy produced; wind uses much more land than that.
太阳能每生产一单位能源要比核能多占用数十倍的土地; 风能占用的土地也比核能多得多。
According to congressional testimony by Armond Cohen of the Clean Air Task Force, meeting all of the eastern United States’ energy needs might require 100,000 square miles of solar panels (an area greater than New England) or more than 800,000 square miles of onshore windmills (Alaska plus California), versus only a bit over 500 square miles of nuclear plants (the city of Phoenix, Arizona).
根据“清洁空气特别工作组”的阿蒙德·科恩在国会的证词，要满足美国东部所有的能源需求，可能需要10万平方英里的太阳能电池板(面积比新英格兰还大)，或者是80多万平方英里的陆上风车(阿拉斯加州与加利福尼亚州面积之和)，而核电站只需要500多平方英里(面积相当于亚利桑那州的凤凰城)。
Given the amount of real estate that solar and wind farms usurp, efforts to place them are running into entirely predictable local resistance, which will only increase as the easiest and cheapest sites are picked off.
鉴于太阳能与风力发电场占用了大量的土地，为其选址的努力正遭遇完全可预见的当地阻力。随着最容易与最便宜的地点被选完，阻力只会越来越大。
