※ 引述《cowardlyman (有功夫无懦夫)》之铭言：
: 1.媒体来源:
: 联合新闻网
: 2.记者署名:
: 2021-03-29 12:12中央社 布鲁塞尔29日综合外电报导
: 3.完整新闻标题:
: 欧盟科学咨询机构：核电符合绿能投资
: 4.完整新闻内文:
原文连结:https://reurl.cc/g8laZp
首先这篇报导带风向的成分很高
外电原标题:
EU experts to say nuclear power qualifies for green investment label: document
明明就绿色投资标章
联合到底在翻什么鬼
总之原文讲得很清楚
its sustainable finance taxonomy, which will decide which economic activities
can be labelled as a sustainable investment in the EU,
也就是只要被列为永续活动分类，就是欧盟认可可投资的项目
但不等于就是绿能投资阿联合报...
另外联合(故意?)不翻译本篇外电的下一段
EU countries are also split over how the taxonomy should treat investments in
natural gas.
After a plan to exclude gas faced pushback from pro-gas countries, the
Commission this month drafted plans to label some gas as sustainable -
splintering countries between those who support the fuel as an alternative to
more-polluting coal, and those who say new gas plants risk locking in
emissions for decades, thwarting climate goals.
完全跳过天然气也是欧盟在本月提出草案将天然气列为永续分类
: https://money.udn.com/money/story/5599/5351041
: 6.备注:
: 欧盟证实核电和核废储存的安全性
: 绿粉说说，还有什么理由反对核能！？？
这篇带风向的比例太重了
实在可怕啊

不好意思齁，因为google机翻也是翻成符合绿能投资= =" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">

原文" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">

google机器翻译所以就当作google也被拥核派渗透好了(摊手)所以EU专家现在说核能符合绿能标准，也能当作绿能啦

就都在带风向 https://tinyurl.com/4uz979a8

就标准是会变的啊。以前说不是，但现在说是啦

这篇还说报告可能把核能当过渡能源“transition fuel”甚

拿GOOGLE机翻来讨论我也是蛮佩服的啦你论文都用GOOGLE机翻喔

至于是显著影响环境的污染能源a polluting form of energy that does “significant harm” to the environment.有的EU专家说符合绿能标准,那是他个人见解,又不是 EU讨论完的结论.

我只是在说如果翻成绿能投资不对的话，表示google也被拥核派渗透了，才会这样翻啊(误)

文章要看完后面有说The Commission declined to commenton the draft document. 委员会拒绝对文件草案发表评论。

就草案是要发表什么评论？等他们正式公布了再说

核能对求环境的影响和天然气一样低

天然气一年烧掉1200亿，你这么有钱呀