上海新航道雅思小編給考生們帶來了劍6Test2雅思閱讀Passage1譯文-公共交通的優勢，希望幫助考生對照文本更好的研究真題，充分備考，爭取理想成績，實現留學夢想。

  Advantages of public transport

  公共交通的優勢

  A new study conducted for the World Bank by Murdoch University’s Institute for Science and Technology Policy (ISTP) has demonstrated that public transport is more efficient than cars. The study compared the proportion of wealth poured into transport by thirty-seven cities around the world. This included both the public and private costs of building, maintaining and using a transport system.

  默多克大學的科技政策研究所(ISTP)為世界銀行做的最新研究表明，公共交通工具的效率髙于小汽車。該研究比較了全世界37座城市公共交通投人資金所占的比例。這其中包括修建、維護和使用公交系統時的政府投人和個人開銷。

  The study found that the Western Australian city of Perth is a good example of a city with minimal public transport. As a result, 17% of its wealth went into transport costs. Some European and Asian cities, on the other hand, spent as little as 5%. Professor Peter Newman, ISTP Director, pointed out that these more efficient cities were able to put the difference into attracting industry and jobs or creating a better place to live.

  研究顯示，西澳大利亞的首府珀斯是最低限度發展公交系統的典型例子。結果是，該市的交通成本竟占政府收人的17%。然而，某些歐洲和亞洲城市的交通成本則僅有5%。研究所主任彼得紐曼教授指出，后面這些效率更高的城市能夠將更多資金投人到發展工業、擴大就業和創造更好的生活環境中去。

  According to Professor Newman, the larger Australian city of Melbourne is a rather unusual city in this sort of comparison. He describes it as two cities: ‘A European city surrounded by a car-dependent one’. Melbourne’s large tram network has made car use in the inner city much lower, but the outer suburbs have the same car-based structure as most other Australian cities. The explosion in demand for accommodation in the inner suburbs of Melbourne suggests a recent change in many people’s preferences as to where they live.

  紐曼認為，如此進行比較的話，規模相對較大的澳大利亞城市墨爾本則顯得格外與眾不同。他將其形容為雙層城市：“一座歐洲城市外面裹著另一座汽車代步城?！蹦珷柋疽幠｝嫶蟮挠熊夒娷嚲W絡大大降低了市內的汽車使用率，但遠郊地區則同大多數其他澳大利亞城市一樣依賴汽車交通。而該市近郊住房需求的激增正顯示出近年來人們在選擇居住地點時觀念的變化。

  Newman says this is a new, broader way of considering public transport issues. In the past, the case for public transport has been made on the basis of environmental and social justice considerations rather than economics. Newman, however, believes the study demonstrates that ‘the auto-dependent city model is inefficient and grossly inadequate in economic as well as environmental terms’.

  據紐曼教授稱，這是一種更廣泛考慮公共交通問題的新方式。過去在解決公共交通問題時，我們通常關心的是環境和社會的合理性，而不是經濟情況。除此之外，紐曼教授認為該研究顯示了“依賴汽車作為交通工具的城市發展模式不僅效率低下，而且在經濟與環境發展方而也相當不足”。

  Bicycle use was not included in the study but Newman noted that the two most ‘bicycle friendly’ cities considered — Amsterdam and Copenhagen — were very efficient, even though their public transport systems were ‘reasonable but not special’.

  自行車沒有包含在此項研究范圍之內。然而，紐曼教授指出在考察研究的37座城市中，阿姆斯特丹和哥本哈根這兩座自行車普及率最高的城市效率也非常高，即便他們的公共交通系統“特色全無，相當一般”。

  It is common for supporters of road networks to reject the models of cities with good public transport by arguing that such systems would not work in their particular city. One objection is climate. Some people say their city could not make more use of public transport because it is either too hot or too cold. Newman rejects this, pointing out that public transport has been successful in both Toronto and Singapore and, in fact, he has checked the use of cars against climate and found ‘zero correlation’.

  公路網的擁護者們普遍反對以發達的公共交通系統為標志的城市發展模式。他們堅持認為該系統在個別城市并不適用。氣候是反對的理由之一。有些人說他們的城市要么夏天太熱，要么冬天太冷，以至于無法充分利用公交系統。紐曼教授則否定了這一觀點，他指出公交系統的發展在多倫多和新加坡地區均獲得了巨大成功。事實上，他調查過是否天氣糟糕人們就會使用汽車，結果發現兩者之間毫無關聯。

  When it comes to other physical features, road lobbies are on stronger ground. For example, Newman accepts it would be hard for a city as hilly as Auckland to develop a really good rail network. However, he points out that both Hong Kong and Zurich have managed to make a success of their rail systems, heavy and light respectively, though there are few cities in the world as hilly.

  當我們考慮到其他硬件條件時，公路網的支持者們就有了更充分的理由。例如，紐曼認同，對于山地城市奧克蘭來說，開發真正成功的軌道交通網是一件困難的事情。然而，他指出，雖然全世界的山地城市為數不多，但香港和蘇黎世都分別設法成功地建成了重型和輕型軌道交通系統。

  In fact, Newman believes the main reason for adopting one sort of transport over another is politics: ‘The more democratic the process, the more public transport is favored.’ He considers Portland, Oregon, a perfect example of this. Some years ago, federal money was granted to build a new road. However, local pressure groups forced a referendum over whether to spend the money on light rail instead. The rail proposal won and the railway worked spectacularly well. In the years that have followed, more and more rail systems have been put in, dramatically changing the nature of the city. Newman notes that Portland has about the same population as Perth and had a similar population density at the time.

  紐曼教授認為，事實上，決定采用哪一種交通運輸方式的主要因素是政治，“決策過程越民主，公共交通就越容易得到支持”。他將美國俄勒岡州的波特蘭市看作是其中的范例。幾年前，國家撥款修建一條新公路。但是，當地的壓力團體強行組織了一次公民投票，來表決是否要將國家撥款花費在建設替代公路的輕軌上。修建輕軌的提議最終獲得通過，而且軌道系統在當地的運行狀況非常良好。在隨后的幾年中，波特蘭市修建了更多的軌道交通系統，城市面貌也因此得到巨大改善。紐曼教授發現，波特蘭市與珀斯市的人口數量大致相同，并且當時的人口密度也十分相近。

  In the UK, travel times to work had been stable for at least six centuries, with people avoiding situations that required them to spend more than half an hour travelling to work. Trains and cars initially allowed people to live at greater distances without taking longer to reach their destination. However, public infrastructure did not keep pace with urban sprawl, causing massive congestion problems which now make commuting times far higher.

  在英國，人們不會去做通勤時間需要半小時以上的工作，因而六百年來，花在上班路途上的時間都得以保持不變。剛開始的時候，火車和汽車使人們住得遠，卻又無需增加花在路途上的時間。然而，公共基礎設施無法跟上城市擴張的步伐，這就導致了大規模的交通擁堵問題，并且使上下班的時間大大延長。

  There is a widespread belief that increasing wealth encourages people to live farther out where cars are the only viable transport. The example of European cities refutes that. They are often wealthier than their American counterparts but have not generated the same level of car use. In Stockholm, car use has actually fallen in recent years as the city has become larger and wealthier. A new study makes this point even more starkly. Developing cities in Asia, such as Jakarta and Bangkok, make more use of the car than wealthy Asian cities such as Tokyo and Singapore. In cities that developed later, the World Bank and Asian Development Bank discouraged the building of public transport and people have been forced to rely on cars — creating the massive traffic jams that characterize those cities.

  有一種廣泛的說法是：財富的不斷增長促使人們到更遠的地方居住，而汽車是那里唯一可行的交通工具。然而許多歐洲城市的例子可以反駁這一觀點。相對于美國城市，歐洲城市通常更加富有，而汽車使用率卻比美國低。近年來，隨著城市規模的不斷擴張和財富的逐年增加，斯德哥爾摩的汽車使用率反而還有所 下降。一項新的研究更清楚地說明了這一點。亞洲的發展中城市，例如雅加達和曼谷，其汽車使用率要高于像東京和新加坡這樣的富裕地區。在發展比較滯后的城市中，世界銀行和亞洲發展銀行不鼓勵修建公共交通系統，因此人們不得不依賴汽車作為交通工具這導致了這些城市中標志性的大塞車。

  Newman believes one of the best studies on how cities built for cars might be converted to rail use is The Urban Village report, which used Melbourne as an example. It found that pushing everyone into the city centre was not the best approach. Instead, the proposal advocated the creation of urban villages at hundreds of sites, mostly around railway stations.

  紐曼教授認為，以墨爾本為例的“城中村”報告是最優秀的研究報告之一，報告主要講述如何將以汽車代步的城市轉變成以軌道交通為主的城市。該報告顯示，讓大家都住在市中心并不是最好的方法。反之，報告主張建立幾百個集中在車站附近的城中村。

  It was once assumed that improvements in telecommunications would lead to more dispersal in the population as people were no longer forced into cities. However, the ISTP team’s research demonstrates that the population and job density of cities rose or remained constant in the 1980s after decades of decline. The explanation for this seems to be that it is valuable to place people working in related fields together. ‘The new world will largely depend on human creativity, and creativity flourishes where people come together face-to-face.’

  曾經有人假設，由于人們不再被迫住在城市，電信的改進將促使人口進一步分散。然而，ISTP研究小組的調查顯示繼幾十年的下降之后，在20世紀80年代，城市人口和職位的密度都保持不變或有所上升。似乎合理的解釋為，將工作在相關領域的人聚集在一起可以創造更大的價值。“未來新世界將主要依靠人類的創造力，而創造力在人們面對面的交流中會更加活躍?！?/span>

  以上就是小編為大家帶來關于《劍橋雅思6真題》閱讀供大家參考，新航道雅思資料頻道將第一時間為考生發布最全、最新、最專業的雅思資訊及雅思考試資料及機經.