A、Studying its impacts on health is of less importance. B、There are sufficient studies for its health damage. C、It’s easier to a

W: Final topic tonight: new estimates on the cost of climate change and the attention it’s drawing about the potential economic effects. For years, reports on climate change have largely been the field of scientists. But a new group of business and political leaders is now trying to focus on the costs. They warned that if carbon dioxide levels continue rising at their current pace, between $66 billion and $106 billion worth of U.S. coastal property will likely be below sea level by two or three decades from now, days with temperatures exceeding 95 degrees may triple, and farm production could drop 14 percent. Led by former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, they started a project called the Risky Business Project, Henry Paulson joins me now. Thank you for being with us.
M: Judy, it’s good to be here.
W: So, this is an effort to focus on the economic impacts of climate change, rather than the effects on human health. Why?
M: Well, absolutely. There’s been a lot of work that’s been done in the past on the environment and the huge risks that the climate poses to the way of life as we lead it here on this planet and so on. But this is the first serious look on an industry-sector-by-industry-sector basis, region-by-region basis to try to quantify the economic impacts, because those are every bit as real as the environmental impacts.
W: So we just heard about some of the data that’s in this report. But let’s try to get a clearer understanding. I mean, when it comes to the coastal areas of the United States, when it comes to temperature change in the center of the country, what are you findings?
M: Now, what we see in some ways shouldn’t be surprising, because areas that are hardest-hit are the coastal areas. Let’s start with the coastal areas. You know, you look out even to just mid-century, and you will have somewhere between $75 billion and $120 billion of infrastructure underwater, so there’s serious damage there. I grew up on a farm in Illinois and if you look at what we call the I-states, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, they get hit pretty hard in terms of agriculture as time moves on. In 15 to 25 years, agricultural production may go down 10 percent. If you go out farther, it goes dramatically down as these states which benefited from being a zone with temperate weather become states that are so dry and farming goes farther—farther north or to Canada.
W: And your concern is that these economic impacts have not really been focused on before now?
M: Yes, that’s absolutely right. And because what you are going to increasingly see, and what we’re seeing right now, is that when Mother Nature acts, and you have these natural disasters, whether they’re tornadoes or hurricanes like Sandy or floods or forest fires, people would expect the government to come in. That’s the role of government. We all pay. These are big economic costs that go along with these. And if you look at it carefully, what you find is, if there was spending today, relatively small amounts of spending, to harden infrastructure and be smart about where you build plants, we could avoid a fair amount of these costs.
1. In the interview, what can the rising levels of carbon dioxide cause?
2. Whv does Henrv’s project focus on the economic impacts of climate change?
3. What may be the finding concerning the center of the country?
4. According to Henry, which of the following could avoid economic costs?
5. What is the interview mainly about?