点击右上角
微信好友
朋友圈
请使用浏览器分享功能进行分享
“00后”消防员的春节：我守护万家灯火，愿你渐入“家”境******
中新网北京1月18日电(韦香惠)“起床——”小年清晨的第一声“起床哨”，在消防员王中嗣听来亲切而又响亮。尽管春节临近，他依然还在执行森林巡护任务，一刻不敢松懈。
出生于2000年的王中嗣，2019年参加工作，现已是内蒙古大兴安岭森林消防支队的一名班长，去年12月来江西省九江市执行跨省驻防任务。
图为王中嗣带队执行巡护任务 受访者供图“今天是小年，大扫除的好日子，大家动作都快一点，一会还要交代防火执勤的注意事项……”作为班长，王中嗣早已养成提前10分钟起床的习惯，总是第一个整理好内务、洗漱，再督导各班内务卫生。
“班长，稍等5分钟，我给我爸妈打个电话。”班里一位队员的“口头假条”提醒王中嗣，小年的日子里，该向父母打个电话了。
“爸，妈，家里年货都置办了吧？我邮了些江西的特产给你们，今年又要在外地过年了，您二老保重！”短短的三两句话，王中嗣却不由得愧疚起来。
这是王中嗣成为森林消防员的第四年，也是他第二次独自在外过年。
庐山五老峰山间，坡度70度左右的悬崖峭壁之上，直线距离1.2公里，山路却走了近1个小时。一支由30人组成的巡山小分队背着20余公斤的灭火装备，厚厚的防火服，走进荆棘遍布的丛林，进行艰难的爬行，他们橙红色的身影远远看上去十分耀眼。
“翻过这个山头，到下一个山头就可以歇会儿了。”王中嗣给大家鼓劲儿。气温零下1°C、风力6级的天气条件下，“白天出透汗，早晚凉透心”，直到正月十五，这都将是消防员们每天巡护的“必修课”。
图为王中嗣带队执行巡护任务 受访者供图“巡护执勤看似非常枯燥，实际意义却重大，江西省的自然生态环境非常好，名胜古迹数不胜数，现在正值秋冬季防火紧要期，防火更是重中之重。”队员们都很佩服这位年龄不大，但灭火经验丰富的“00后”班长。
“南方和北方的自然环境真是差别太大了，这山的坡度都快成直角了。”回忆起前段时间参加九江市都昌“12·26”森林火灾的灭火救援任务，同班的消防员李凯心有余悸，“要不是王班长拽我一下，那棵倒木可能就砸我脑瓜子上来了，而不是砸在风机筒上了”。
在王中嗣看来，火场上瞬息万变，加上这里山势陡峭，每次出任务都不能掉以轻心。“其实，上山巡护我们都习以为常了，春节期间任务重，我们也只是干好本职工作，而且平时训练到位，这点苦不算啥。”
天色渐暗，庐山的秀丽景色掩入深重的雾气之中。巡护结束，王中嗣向中队长报告，这天的执勤情况一切正常。
返回营区途中，他给家里人发去信息，“春节，是一年里最重要的日子，过年，是渴望故乡重逢的时节，团聚，是值得重温的美好回忆。但对于有些人来说，是使命任务在肩，是坚守战斗岗位，是守护万家灯火”。(完)
中新网评：处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事****** 中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称，将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对，企图将核污水“一倒了之”，把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。  资料图：日本福岛第一核电站。2011年，福岛核电站事故发生后，大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋，对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害，数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日，作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。 日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由，在2021年4月13日，正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多，日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。 日本政府辩称，这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全，甚至“可以喝”，这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。 事实上，经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质，核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收，长期来看，将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁，最终危害人类健康。 因此，核污水排海计划推出后，遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示，福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中，约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场，反对该计划。 日本政府认为，核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案，但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海，核污水会随着洋流流动，其影响势必会跨越国界，危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。 《韩国经济新闻》发文称，相关研究认为，福岛核污水如果排放入海，约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域，该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。 德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告，若日本将所有核污水排入海中，不到半年，整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁，包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。 日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国，有义务保护海洋环境。然而，在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上，日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。 国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估，但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论，并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下，日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设，这是极不负责任的行为。 太平洋不是日本的下水道，日本必须正视各方合理关切，在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后，制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远，若只顾眼前，执意将核污水排放入海，不仅其自身，周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单，其后果必将会危害数代人。  Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business By John Lee (ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year. Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business. The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster. On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year. The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public. In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run. Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public. The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution. The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community. The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses. According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan. As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment. However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact. Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad. The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies. If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence. 
|
)