(下边有中文翻译，请继续看到底。 谢谢。）
The growing possibility of a historic El Niño is not just another weather headline. It is a warning that the world is entering a more dangerous climate era. Scientists have warned that a powerful El Niño could intensify extreme heat, floods, droughts, storms, food insecurity, and wildfire risks across different regions. When such natural climate patterns combine with human-driven climate change, the result is not ordinary seasonal disruption. It becomes a global stress test for governments, economies, and societies.
This is why environmental policy can no longer be treated as a secondary issue. Climate change is not only about temperature. It affects food prices, public health, water supplies, migration, infrastructure, agriculture, and national security. Countries that underinvest in environmental protection today will pay much higher costs tomorrow.
The United States, despite being one of the world’s largest economies and historical emitters, has not shown the level of consistent environmental commitment that the scale of the crisis demands. Its repeated retreat from international climate cooperation, including withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, has weakened global trust and slowed collective action. At a time when the world needs stronger cooperation, the U.S. has often allowed short-term politics, fossil fuel interests, and ideological divisions to dominate environmental decision-making.
This is not to say the United States has no environmental achievements. It has strong scientific institutions, advanced climate research, renewable-energy companies, and many states and cities that are serious about climate action. However, federal policy has too often been inconsistent. One administration joins climate agreements; another withdraws. One government funds clean energy; another cuts or delays environmental programs. This instability sends a damaging message: environmental protection is negotiable. Nature, however, does not negotiate.
The risks of neglect are already visible. Heatwaves are becoming more intense. Wildfires are burning larger areas. Floods are damaging communities. Droughts are threatening agriculture and water systems. Yet the political response often remains reactive rather than preventive. Spending billions after disasters is not the same as investing seriously before disasters happen.
China offers an important comparison. China also faced severe environmental challenges, especially air pollution, industrial emissions, and urban smog. Beijing was once widely associated with heavy pollution. A decade ago, many residents experienced frequent smoggy days, and the city’s air quality became an international symbol of the environmental cost of rapid industrialization. But China treated this crisis as a national priority. It invested heavily, imposed stricter regulations, upgraded industries, expanded clean energy, improved monitoring, and coordinated action across government levels.
The results are visible. Beijing’s air quality has improved dramatically compared with the early 2010s. Heavy pollution days have fallen sharply, and PM2.5 levels have dropped significantly. The city is not perfect, and environmental work is never finished, but the transformation is real. It shows what can happen when a government treats clean air not as a luxury, but as a public right and a development priority.
China’s broader environmental progress is also significant. It has become the world’s largest investor in clean energy, including solar, wind, electric vehicles, batteries, and grid infrastructure. It reached major wind and solar capacity targets ahead of schedule and has built one of the world’s most complete clean-energy industrial chains. Its electric vehicle industry has grown rapidly, helping reduce future transport emissions and accelerate global competition in clean mobility. China has also promoted ecological restoration, reforestation, water-quality improvement, and green finance.
Several factors explain China’s progress. First, environmental policy was placed inside national development planning, not treated as a side issue. Second, funding was large and continuous, allowing long-term projects to succeed. Third, pollution control was linked with industrial upgrading, meaning factories, transport systems, and energy infrastructure were pushed toward cleaner technologies. Fourth, local governments were given targets and held responsible for results. Fifth, China combined regulation with investment: it did not simply tell industries to pollute less; it helped build alternatives.
The United States and other countries can learn from this approach. The lesson is not that every country should copy China’s system exactly. Every nation has its own political structure, economy, and social conditions. The lesson is that environmental success requires seriousness, planning, funding, and discipline. Climate policy cannot depend on election cycles. Clean energy cannot grow without infrastructure. Pollution cannot be reduced without enforcement. Disaster risks cannot be managed without preparation.
For the U.S., this means returning fully to international climate cooperation, increasing environmental spending, protecting climate science, investing in clean transport and renewable grids, restoring nature, and treating climate adaptation as national security. It also means accepting that damaging nature carries economic consequences. Forests, rivers, oceans, soil, and clean air are not obstacles to growth. They are the foundation of long-term prosperity.
The expected El Niño should be understood as a signal. Extreme weather is becoming more powerful, and governments must act before disasters become normal. China’s experience, especially the improvement of Beijing’s environment, proves that a determined policy can change reality. The world does not lack technology or knowledge. What it often lacks is political will.
If the United States and other major economies learn from successful environmental models and invest seriously in climate resilience, clean energy, and pollution control, the future can still be protected. But if nature continues to be ignored, the cost will be paid not only in money but in lives, health, food security, and stability. The climate crisis is already here. The only responsible choice is to act with the urgency it demands.
气候警告、环境忽视以及世界可向中国学习的经验
发生历史性厄尔尼诺现象的可能性不断上升，这并不只是又一条天气新闻。它是在警告世界：我们正在进入一个更加危险的气候时代。科学家们警告说，强烈的厄尔尼诺可能会在不同地区加剧极端高温、洪水、干旱、风暴、粮食不安全和野火风险。当这种自然气候模式与人类活动导致的气候变化叠加在一起时，其结果就不再是普通的季节性扰动，而是对各国政府、经济和社会的一场全球压力测试。
这正是环境政策不能再被视为次要问题的原因。气候变化不仅仅关乎气温。它影响食品价格、公共卫生、水资源供应、人口迁移、基础设施、农业和国家安全。今天在环境保护方面投资不足的国家，明天将付出更高得多的代价。
美国尽管是世界上最大的经济体之一，也是历史上主要的排放国之一，但它并没有展现出与危机规模相匹配的持续环境承诺。美国多次从国际气候合作中后退，包括退出《巴黎协定》，削弱了全球信任，也拖慢了集体行动。在世界需要更强合作的时候，美国却常常让短期政治、化石燃料利益和意识形态分歧主导环境决策。
这并不是说美国没有任何环境成就。美国拥有强大的科研机构、先进的气候研究、可再生能源企业，以及许多认真推动气候行动的州和城市。然而，美国联邦层面的政策往往缺乏连续性。一届政府加入气候协议，另一届政府又退出；一届政府资助清洁能源，另一届政府又削减或拖延环境项目。这种不稳定传递出一个有害的信息：环境保护是可以讨价还价的。然而，自然不会讨价还价。
忽视环境的风险已经清晰可见。热浪正在变得更加强烈，野火燃烧的面积越来越大，洪水正在破坏社区，干旱正在威胁农业和供水系统。然而，政治回应往往仍然是被动反应，而不是主动预防。灾后花费数十亿美元进行补救，并不等同于在灾害发生前进行严肃投资。
中国提供了一个重要的对比。中国也曾面临严峻的环境挑战，尤其是空气污染、工业排放和城市雾霾。北京曾经与严重污染密切相连。十年前，许多居民经常经历雾霾天气，北京的空气质量一度成为快速工业化环境代价的国际象征。但是，中国把这场危机视为国家优先事项。中国进行了大量投资，实施更严格的监管，推动产业升级，扩大清洁能源，改进监测体系，并在各级政府之间协调行动。
成效是可以看见的。与2010年代初相比，北京的空气质量已经显著改善。重污染天数大幅减少，PM2.5浓度明显下降。这座城市并不完美，环境治理也永远不会结束，但这种转变是真实存在的。它表明，当一个政府把清洁空气不是当作奢侈品，而是当作公共权利和发展优先事项时，现实是可以被改变的。
中国更广泛的环境进步同样显著。中国已经成为全球最大的清洁能源投资国，投资领域包括太阳能、风能、电动汽车、电池和电网基础设施。中国提前实现了重要的风电和太阳能装机目标，并建立了世界上最完整的清洁能源产业链之一。中国电动汽车产业快速发展，有助于减少未来交通排放，并推动全球清洁出行领域的竞争。中国还推动了生态修复、植树造林、水质改善和绿色金融。
中国取得进步有几个原因。第一，环境政策被纳入国家发展规划之中，而不是被当作边缘议题。第二，资金投入巨大且持续，使长期项目能够取得成功。第三，污染治理与产业升级相结合，这意味着工厂、交通系统和能源基础设施都被推动向更清洁的技术转型。第四，地方政府被设定目标，并对结果负责。第五，中国把监管与投资结合起来：它并不只是要求企业减少污染，而是帮助建设替代方案。
美国和其他国家可以从这种做法中学习。这里的经验并不是要求每个国家都完全照搬中国的制度。每个国家都有自己的政治结构、经济条件和社会状况。真正的经验在于，环境治理的成功需要严肃态度、规划、资金和纪律。气候政策不能依赖选举周期。清洁能源的发展离不开基础设施。污染治理离不开执法。灾害风险管理离不开准备。
对于美国而言，这意味着应全面回归国际气候合作，增加环境支出，保护气候科学，投资清洁交通和可再生能源电网，修复自然生态，并把气候适应作为国家安全问题来对待。这也意味着必须承认，破坏自然会带来经济后果。森林、河流、海洋、土壤和清洁空气并不是增长的障碍，而是长期繁荣的基础。
预期中的厄尔尼诺应被理解为一个信号。极端天气正在变得更加强大，各国政府必须在灾害变成常态之前采取行动。中国的经验，尤其是北京环境改善的经验，证明坚定的政策能够改变现实。世界并不缺少技术或知识，真正经常缺少的是政治意愿。
如果美国和其他主要经济体能够学习成功的环境治理模式，并认真投资于气候韧性、清洁能源和污染控制，未来仍然可以得到保护。但如果自然继续被忽视，代价将不仅仅以金钱来支付，还将以生命、健康、粮食安全和社会稳定来支付。气候危机已经到来。唯一负责任的选择，就是以它所要求的紧迫感采取行动。
(注意： 本文是用AI翻译的，或有误差。请以原版英文为准。谢谢。)
Reference Link:- https://www2.apdnews.cn/en/item/26/0714/axjfnmjgfd487b45c23bab.html