论文部分内容阅读
Recent reports show that Beijing might levy pollutant discharge fees on automobiles. Gas stations will add the fee onto existing prices. Every liter of gas will require an approximate 2 yuan （$0.32） charge. The current oil price in the capital is about 7 yuan （$1.11）， which means it may jump to 10 yuan （$1.59） per liter.
This news has sparked heated discussions on the Internet. Most people have expressed anger at the new policy， while some experts doubt its efficiency in curbing pollution and improving the urban environment， arguing that improving gas quality will do more good. The following are excerpts of opinions：
Li Yuheng （China Industrial Economy News）： Why is the vehicle emission fee so strongly opposed？ The major reason is that those who are to be charged are auto owners already under heavy tax burdens. Another reason is the vagueness of the fee collection standard. The current technique for exhaust emission tests is quite outdated， in light of the poor quality of fuel in some cases， which might lead to unfairness.
The discharge fee is to some extent indicating the government’s efforts to push forward the use of new energy vehicles. Due to reasons like high prices and underdeveloped charging facilities for electronic cars， 74.4 percent of consumers surveyed said they would not turn to new energy vehicles just because of the emission fee.
While such a policy implies social benefits， applying it is a problem. There should be a scientific scheme set up to effectively curb the discharge of pollutants， while the use of collected fees is crystallized. Besides， favorable policies should be worked out to encourage more people to use clean energy vehicles.
Luo Lei （Qilu Evening News）： Various auto-related tax fee charges actually account for 40-144 percent of the price of a vehicle. Buyers have to pay value-added， sales and consumption taxes when purchasing cars， in addition to subsequent vehicle and fuel charges. If a vehicle emission fee is added， I’m afraid auto consumption will be curbed.
Pu Jiangchao （Jiangsu Economic News）： The vehicle emission fee is to be levied in accordance with discharge volumes. Drivers will be asked to pay for the pollution they cause to the environment， which makes the policy quite necessary. However， the fact is， drivers are actually already paying for discharging pollutants. It’s unfair to demand they pay overlapping fees.
Before the fee is put into practice， public opinion should be fully taken into consideration. It’s better to turn the “vehicle emission fee” into a “vehicle emission tax.” Before actual practice， it should be submitted to the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress for discussion. Lin Huiying （Southern Metropolis Daily）： Car-related pollution will not drop if car owners pay for gas emissions.
Such emission is the major source of fine particulate matter. We all hope to breathe cleaner air and live under a blue and clean sky. As for how to reduce pollution and save energy， there is a lot to be done to improve the situation in China’s auto industry. Here， the sector tends to stress oil consumption statistics， but seldom announce figures on the discharge of carbon dioxide. In Europe， however， when an auto company issues all kinds of parameters for new types， the discharge of carbon dioxide per 100 km will be announced accordingly， reminding car users of environmental protection while enjoying driving comfort.
Another thing that can be done to reduce pollution is to improve the quality of gasoline and diesel. This may be a better choice in air pollution reduction. It’s hoped that before authorities work out certain fee policies， they first spend some time finding out the key to the problem.
Li Xiumin （Southern Metropolis Daily）： There are successful examples of such charges curbing auto exhaust emissions in other cities， including New York and London. When it comes to China， we still have to ask the question： Is it necessary to charge a pollutant discharge fee， and to what extent will it help reduce pollution？ And if so， what scheme is acceptable？
In a recent online survey， 76.7 percent participants said the fee charge is unreasonable， with only 5 percent agreeing it would “help to effectively reduce exhaust emissions.”
Actually， if a city wants to reduce air pollution， the fundamental way is to adjust current policies concerning the auto industry， ensure excellent urban planning and develop a convenient public transportation system. To feed cars more environmentally friendly petroleum is also very important.
It’s necessary to listen to car users on pollutant discharge fee collection， as they might have practical suggestions and advice. Even if the economic leverage is employed to cut autorelated pollution， there should be a fair standard.
Xiao Yong （www.jschina.com.cn）： City dwellers are seriously affected by air pollution caused by auto exhaust emissions. Thus， those who do not use cars will mostly support the new fee charge. Although compared to several years ago， exhaust emissions have been somewhat reduced， it remains the major pollution source in big cities. Unfortunately， while the auto industry has developed as one of the pillar industries in China， regulations and laws on the management of this sector are comparatively outdated. The expansion of private cars on the streets， causing serious air pollution， is increasingly criticized. Energy conservation and domestic de- mand stimulus are two targets in the process of China’s economic development. However， now they appear opposed to each other. Are the two targets really conflicting？ Actually， the fundamental purpose of economic development is to make people live better and in a cleaner environment. If we first pollute the environment， then try to fix it， we will pay a higher price.
The fee can not only curb the sharply rising momentum of private car purchase and use， thus reducing pressure on urban transportation as well as air pollution， but is also in the longterm interests of most people.
China’s auto manufacturing industry is still a big source of pollution at a relatively low manufacturing level. Thus， a vehicle emission fee will help encourage auto companies to adjust and improve manufacturing methods to develop more environmentally friendly vehicles.
Dear Readers，
Forum is a column that provides a space for varying perspectives on contemporary Chinese society. We invite you to submit personal viewpoints on past and current topics（in either English or Chinese）.
This news has sparked heated discussions on the Internet. Most people have expressed anger at the new policy， while some experts doubt its efficiency in curbing pollution and improving the urban environment， arguing that improving gas quality will do more good. The following are excerpts of opinions：
Li Yuheng （China Industrial Economy News）： Why is the vehicle emission fee so strongly opposed？ The major reason is that those who are to be charged are auto owners already under heavy tax burdens. Another reason is the vagueness of the fee collection standard. The current technique for exhaust emission tests is quite outdated， in light of the poor quality of fuel in some cases， which might lead to unfairness.
The discharge fee is to some extent indicating the government’s efforts to push forward the use of new energy vehicles. Due to reasons like high prices and underdeveloped charging facilities for electronic cars， 74.4 percent of consumers surveyed said they would not turn to new energy vehicles just because of the emission fee.
While such a policy implies social benefits， applying it is a problem. There should be a scientific scheme set up to effectively curb the discharge of pollutants， while the use of collected fees is crystallized. Besides， favorable policies should be worked out to encourage more people to use clean energy vehicles.
Luo Lei （Qilu Evening News）： Various auto-related tax fee charges actually account for 40-144 percent of the price of a vehicle. Buyers have to pay value-added， sales and consumption taxes when purchasing cars， in addition to subsequent vehicle and fuel charges. If a vehicle emission fee is added， I’m afraid auto consumption will be curbed.
Pu Jiangchao （Jiangsu Economic News）： The vehicle emission fee is to be levied in accordance with discharge volumes. Drivers will be asked to pay for the pollution they cause to the environment， which makes the policy quite necessary. However， the fact is， drivers are actually already paying for discharging pollutants. It’s unfair to demand they pay overlapping fees.
Before the fee is put into practice， public opinion should be fully taken into consideration. It’s better to turn the “vehicle emission fee” into a “vehicle emission tax.” Before actual practice， it should be submitted to the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress for discussion. Lin Huiying （Southern Metropolis Daily）： Car-related pollution will not drop if car owners pay for gas emissions.
Such emission is the major source of fine particulate matter. We all hope to breathe cleaner air and live under a blue and clean sky. As for how to reduce pollution and save energy， there is a lot to be done to improve the situation in China’s auto industry. Here， the sector tends to stress oil consumption statistics， but seldom announce figures on the discharge of carbon dioxide. In Europe， however， when an auto company issues all kinds of parameters for new types， the discharge of carbon dioxide per 100 km will be announced accordingly， reminding car users of environmental protection while enjoying driving comfort.
Another thing that can be done to reduce pollution is to improve the quality of gasoline and diesel. This may be a better choice in air pollution reduction. It’s hoped that before authorities work out certain fee policies， they first spend some time finding out the key to the problem.
Li Xiumin （Southern Metropolis Daily）： There are successful examples of such charges curbing auto exhaust emissions in other cities， including New York and London. When it comes to China， we still have to ask the question： Is it necessary to charge a pollutant discharge fee， and to what extent will it help reduce pollution？ And if so， what scheme is acceptable？
In a recent online survey， 76.7 percent participants said the fee charge is unreasonable， with only 5 percent agreeing it would “help to effectively reduce exhaust emissions.”
Actually， if a city wants to reduce air pollution， the fundamental way is to adjust current policies concerning the auto industry， ensure excellent urban planning and develop a convenient public transportation system. To feed cars more environmentally friendly petroleum is also very important.
It’s necessary to listen to car users on pollutant discharge fee collection， as they might have practical suggestions and advice. Even if the economic leverage is employed to cut autorelated pollution， there should be a fair standard.
Xiao Yong （www.jschina.com.cn）： City dwellers are seriously affected by air pollution caused by auto exhaust emissions. Thus， those who do not use cars will mostly support the new fee charge. Although compared to several years ago， exhaust emissions have been somewhat reduced， it remains the major pollution source in big cities. Unfortunately， while the auto industry has developed as one of the pillar industries in China， regulations and laws on the management of this sector are comparatively outdated. The expansion of private cars on the streets， causing serious air pollution， is increasingly criticized. Energy conservation and domestic de- mand stimulus are two targets in the process of China’s economic development. However， now they appear opposed to each other. Are the two targets really conflicting？ Actually， the fundamental purpose of economic development is to make people live better and in a cleaner environment. If we first pollute the environment， then try to fix it， we will pay a higher price.
The fee can not only curb the sharply rising momentum of private car purchase and use， thus reducing pressure on urban transportation as well as air pollution， but is also in the longterm interests of most people.
China’s auto manufacturing industry is still a big source of pollution at a relatively low manufacturing level. Thus， a vehicle emission fee will help encourage auto companies to adjust and improve manufacturing methods to develop more environmentally friendly vehicles.
Dear Readers，
Forum is a column that provides a space for varying perspectives on contemporary Chinese society. We invite you to submit personal viewpoints on past and current topics（in either English or Chinese）.