- Luyện đọc tìm từ vựng nhé.
Bài đọc hôm nay là: THE GROWTH OF BIKE-SHARING SCHEMES AROUND THE WORLD
How Dutch engineer Luud Schimmelpennink helped to devise urban bike-sharing schemes
A. The original idea for an urban bike-sharing scheme dates back to a summer's day in Amsterdam in 1965. Provo, the organisation that came up with the idea, was a group of Dutch activists who wanted to change society. They believed the scheme, which was known as the Witte Fietsenplan, was an answer to the perceived threats of air pollution and consumerism. In the centre of Amsterdam, they painted a small number of used bikes white. They also distributed leaflets describing the dangers of cars and inviting people to use the white bikes. The bikes were then left unlocked at various locations around the city, to be used by anyone in need of transport.
B. Luud Schimmelpennink, a Dutch industrial engineer who still lives and cycles in Amsterdam, was heavily involved in the original scheme. He recalls how the scheme succeeded in attracting a great deal of attention - particularly when it came to publicising Provo's aims - but struggled to get off the ground. The police were opposed to Provo's initiatives and almost as soon as the white bikes were distributed around the city, they removed them. However, for Schimmelpennink and for bike-sharing schemes in general, this was just the beginning. 'The first Witte Fietsenplan was just a symbolic thing,' he says. 'We painted a few bikes white, that was all. Things got more serious when I became a member of the Amsterdam city council two years later.'
C. Schimmelpennink seized this opportunity to present a more elaborate Witte Fietsenplan to the city council. 'My idea was that the municipality of Amsterdam would distribute 10,000 white bikes over the city, for everyone to use,' he explains. 'I made serious calculations. It turned out that a white bicycle - per person, per kilometre - would cost the municipality only 10% of what it contributed to public transport per person per kilometre.' Nevertheless, the council unanimously rejected the plan. 'They said that the bicycle belongs to the past. They saw a glorious future for the car,' says Schimmelpennink. But he was not in the least discouraged.
D. Schimmelpennink never stopped believing in bike-sharing, and in the mid-90s, two Danes asked for his help to set up a system in Copenhagen. The result was the world's first large-scale bike-share programme. It worked on a deposit: 'You dropped a coin in the bike and when you returned it, you got your money back.' After setting up the Danish system, Schimmelpennink decided to try his luck again in the Netherlands - and this time he succeeded in arousing the interest of the Dutch Ministry of Transport. 'Times had changed,' he recalls. 'People had become more environmentally conscious, and the Danish experiment had proved that bike-sharing was a real possibility.' A new Witte Fietsenplan was launched in 1999 in Amsterdam. However, riding a white bike was no longer free; it cost one guilder per trip and payment was made with a chip card developed by the Dutch bank Postbank. Schimmelpennink designed conspicuous, sturdy white bikes locked in special racks which could be opened with the chip card- the plan started with 250 bikes, distributed over five stations.
E. Theo Molenaar, who was a system designer for the project, worked alongside Schimmelpennink. 'I remember when we were testing the bike racks, he announced that he had already designed better ones. But of course, we had to go through with the ones we had.' The system, however, was prone to vandalism and theft. 'After every weekend there would always be a couple of bikes missing,' Molenaar says. 'I really have no idea what people did with them, because they could instantly be recognised as white bikes.' But the biggest blow came when Postbank decided to abolish the chip card, because it wasn't profitable. 'That chip card was pivotal to the system,' Molenaar says. 'To continue the project we would have needed to set up another system, but the business partner had lost interest.'
F. Schimmelpennink was disappointed, but- characteristically- not for long. In 2002 he got a call from the French advertising corporation JC Decaux, who wanted to set up his bike-sharing scheme in Vienna. 'That went really well. After Vienna, they set up a system in Lyon. Then in 2007, Paris followed. That was a decisive moment in the history of bike-sharing.' The huge and unexpected success of the Parisian bike-sharing programme, which now boasts more than 20,000 bicycles, inspired cities all over the world to set up their own schemes, all modelled on Schimmelpennink's. 'It's wonderful that this happened,' he says. 'But financially I didn't really benefit from it, because I never filed for a patent.'
G. In Amsterdam today, 38% of all trips are made by bike and, along with Copenhagen, it is regarded as one of the two most cycle-friendly capitals in the world - but the city never got another Witte Fietsenplan. Molenaar believes this may be because everybody in Amsterdam already has a bike. Schimmelpennink, however, cannot see that this changes Amsterdam's need for a bike-sharing scheme. 'People who travel on the underground don't carry their bikes around. But often they need additional transport to reach their final destination.' Although he thinks it is strange that a city like Amsterdam does not have a successful bike sharing scheme, he is optimistic about the future. 'In the '60s we didn't stand a chance because people were prepared to give their lives to keep cars in the city. But that mentality has totally changed. Today everybody longs for cities that are not dominated by cars.'
original (adj): đầu tiên
scheme (n): kế hoạch
activist (n): nhà hoạt động xã hội
perceived (adj): nhận biết; threat (n): mối đe dọa
consumerism (n): sự bảo vệ quyền lợi người tiêu dùng
struggle (v): đấu tranh
opposed (adj): phản đối
initiative (n): sáng kiến
symbolic (adj): tượng trưng
seize (v): nắm bắt
elaborate (adj): phức tạp
municipality (n): thành phố tự trị
unanimously (adv): đồng lòng, nhất trí
glorious (adj): huy hoàng
deposit (n): tiền đặt cọc
arouse (v): đánh thức
conscious (adj): nhận thức
conspicuous (adj): đáng chú ý
vandalism (n): hành động cố ý phá hoại
theft (n): hành vi trộm cắp
abolish (v): hủy bỏ
profitable (adj): có lợi
pivotal (adj): chủ chốt, then chốt
characteristically (adv): một cách đặc trưng
decisive (adj): kiên quyết
unexpected (adj): bấtt ngờ
boast (v): khoe khoang
optimistic (adj): lạc quan
mentality (n): tâm tính
Các bạn cùng lưu về tham khảo nha.
how serious is air pollution 在 Shadow Facebook 的最讚貼文
《給今天仍然認為示威者破壞香港的人》(added english version, scroll down)
常見論調:
(一)無論你有甚麼訴求,都不要搞亂香港
你認為示威者的堵路、破壞是導致:
1. 交通癱瘓/擠塞/提早停車
2. 令你不能準時上班/外出
3. 經濟不景
等的主因?
錯。 因為你看不到
1. 十八區瀰漫不知多少催淚氣體,會長期對所有香港人健康造成極大影響
2. 濫捕濫暴無法無天,下一位受害可能就是你或你的子女/朋友/身邊人/親人
3. 逐漸收緊及消失的自由和權利,包括遊行/集會/言論
4. 私人地方不再是私人地方,居民竟然要在自家大堂跪地舉高手搜身,甚至被捕。大學校園淪為戰地,學生被屠殺。
5. 地鐵一些閘/出口根本沒有受破壞,只是配合政權
等等。
政權腐敗才是社會動盪的主因。無論你們正處於收成期/還在社會打拼,請認清楚,漠視民意的政府,瘋狂屠殺港人的恐怖份子,才是搞亂香港。
(二)這樣能爭取到自由民主嗎?(指打砸搶的畫面)
不。只是二百萬人上街的和平遊行、多個數十萬/數萬人/各行各業發起的集會、人鏈、摺紙鶴、唱歌,無數和平的方法都嘗試過後,訴求得不到聆聽,警暴更加肆虐,甚至有否不反對通知書亦無法行使集會遊行權利之時,比較激烈的手法才隨之出現。
【打】你們最喜歡說:示威者不就是連中年人/老人家都打,政見不同便打?不是暴徒是甚麼?
1. 請看完整片段/了解事情來龍去脈。每次均是該中年/老人先撩者賤,自衛&反擊也合理不過。
2. 政見不同便打?哦,有的。藍絲的士司機撞斷女子雙腿,連儂牆斬女記者至重傷,年輕男生手腳斬至見骨,咬掉議員耳朵,用刀捅路人夫婦至危殆等。他們才因為政見不同而產生極端仇恨,嚴重傷害他人身體吧?這些才是暴徒。
【砸/燒】 有關為甚麼示威者會破壞某店舖/鐵,坊間太多解釋。別懶,自己search一下好好看看。
另外,暴力行為當然無法帶來自由民主,藍絲知道就最好了,請收手。
(三)讀書有何用,都被煽動了,一定收了錢
【學歷高/有讀書】 你要別人相信那些發聲的大學生、老師、教授、醫生、護士、救護人員、公務員、律師、博士、碩士、社工等等都被煽動?還是學歷低的五毛藍絲才不懂明辨是非黑白?我相信大部分人都會認同後者較容易受煽動/不動腦吧。
【煽動】 那麼容易受煽動,你怎麼不煽動他們?
【收錢論】 若然當前線能夠收到那麼多錢,甚至買樓,就所有人都衝去當前線了。大眾只知道機場那記者收了十萬,撞人的士司機也收了五十二萬,黑警ot也收穫甚豐。
————————————————
好好想想。
你們支持毒打、虐待、甚至殺害示威者是多麼泯滅人性,
是有多蠢,才看不到誰在搞亂香港。
天真自私地認為這樣就能令香港回復繁榮穩定。
如果你們的子女/朋友/親人是示威者的話,
你們不配擁有他們。
[english version]
《To those who still blame protesters for destroying Hong Kong》
Common views of you guys:
(A)Regardless of your requests, just stop creating chaos in Hong Kong
You think protesters block roads and destroy public facilities/glass/MTR station facilities are the main reason/factor that lead to:
1. Traffic congestion/gridlok/early closure/temporarily closed of transportation
2. Not being able to come to work on time/ go out
3. Economic recession/distress
Not at all.
It’s only because you cannot see that:
1. Countless tear gas diffused in the air that air pollution will have a serious and prolonged negative effect on all Hong Kongers’ health.
2. Indiscriminate arrests & countless experiences of police brutality, you or your child/friends/family members may be the next target to face police misconduct and violence.
3. Freedom & rights are gradually tightening and vanishing, including rally, assembly and freedom of speech
4. No more private properties and place. For instances, residents kneeled down and let cops searched their body & even made arrest at lobby of their residential building. University campus turned into war zone , students are facing a massacre.
5. Some exits/ ticket machines/ gates of MTR weren’t destroyed. MTR was only cooperated/bowed to the regime.
etc.
Corrupted regime is the main reason of social instability / chaos. No matter you are retired/ rich enough / still working, please open your eyes and realise that this government which keeps turning a blind eye to public opinions & these crazy green terrorists who maltreat and kill Hongkongers, are those who create chaos in Hong Kong.
(B)Doing this can fight for /achieve freedom and democracy?(referring to scenes of protesters beat/hit/destroy/light fire)
No. But these rather radical measures only took place after protesters already tried & participated in numerous peaceful activities such as 1 & 2 million people peaceful rallies (6.9,6.16,8.18) , tens/hundreds of thousand people joined assemblies & assemblies of different industries, human chains, fold paper crane, sing songs, and still, the government ignored them & the escalating police violence & even when protesters are now deprived of rights to assembly and rally with or without Letter of No Objection.
【Hit/beat people】You guys always love to say, ‘Protesters beat middle-aged/elderly, and those who have different views. If they are not rioters, who are they?'
1. Please watch the whole, complete video/broadcast & find out the ins and outs first. Everytime that middle-aged/elderly provoked the fight, so it makes perfect sense for protesters/Hongkongers to fight back/self-defense/protect themselves.
2. Beating people with different political views? Oh, yes. The blue ribbon taxi driver drove to the crowd of protesters and hit a 23-year-old woman that her legs suffered serious fractures, another blue ribbon uncle stabed a young female reporters at lennon wall in Tseong Kwan O that she was severely injured , young boy being slashed with a knife which caused very deep wounds that he could not walk, bit off a ear of a district councillor, stabbed pedestrians at Taikoo etc. These blue ribbons are the ones who have maximum level of intense hatred towards protesters that they deliberately and insanely hurt other people. These are the real rioters.
【Destroy public facilities/ light fire】 Regarding why protesters destroy certain shops/MTR, there are plenty of explanations circulating around. Stop being lazybones, search them yourself and have a good read.
Besides, of course violence acts cannot bring freedom and democracy. It would be great if blue ribbons know, and please stop doing it.
(Three)What’s the use of studying? Students are being incited/stoked up/ they must have received money/benefits.
【Highly-educated/educated】 Don’t you think anyone with a clear mind would believe that those university students, teachers, professors , doctors, medical professionals, civil servants, lawyers, social workers etc. are being incited/instigated?Or rather, they would think that those 0.5/blue ribbons who are undereducated /less educated are easier to be deceived without knowing it? I believe the latter is more convincing.
【Stoke up】If it is that easy to incite anger/ persuade students/ young people/ any protester, why don’t you instigate them?
【Views of protesters receiving money/benefits to take part in the movement】 If being a frontline protesters can earn/receive that much money/benefits or even enough to buy a house, then everyone would be a frontline. The public only know that the reporter at the airport received RMB $100k, the taxi driver received $520k and the cops earn a great deal of money from working overtime.
————————————————
Please stop and think.
You guys lost your humanity when supporting the beatings, maltreating and even killing the protesters.
What an idiot you are to not being able to know & see who are ruining Hong Kong and creating all these chaos.
How selfish and naive for you to think that by hurting and arrest all protesters can let Hong Kong resume its stability and prosperity.
If your child/ friend/ relatives are one of the protesters,
you don’t deserve them.
———
Ig : Luetsicga
how serious is air pollution 在 煲劇廢噏 Literal Nothing Facebook 的精選貼文
《給今天仍然認為示威者破壞香港的人》(added english version, scroll down)
常見論調:
(一)無論你有甚麼訴求,都不要搞亂香港
你認為示威者的堵路、破壞是導致:
1. 交通癱瘓/擠塞/提早停車
2. 令你不能準時上班/外出
3. 經濟不景
等的主因?
錯。 因為你看不到
1. 十八區瀰漫不知多少催淚氣體,會長期對所有香港人健康造成極大影響
2. 濫捕濫暴無法無天,下一位受害可能就是你或你的子女/朋友/身邊人/親人
3. 逐漸收緊及消失的自由和權利,包括遊行/集會/言論
4. 私人地方不再是私人地方,居民竟然要在自家大堂跪地舉高手搜身,甚至被捕。大學校園淪為戰地,學生被屠殺。
5. 地鐵一些閘/出口根本沒有受破壞,只是配合政權
等等。
政權腐敗才是社會動盪的主因。無論你們正處於收成期/還在社會打拼,請認清楚,漠視民意的政府,瘋狂屠殺港人的恐怖份子,才是搞亂香港。
(二)這樣能爭取到自由民主嗎?(指打砸搶的畫面)
不。只是二百萬人上街的和平遊行、多個數十萬/數萬人/各行各業發起的集會、人鏈、摺紙鶴、唱歌,無數和平的方法都嘗試過後,訴求得不到聆聽,警暴更加肆虐,甚至有否不反對通知書亦無法行使集會遊行權利之時,比較激烈的手法才隨之出現。
【打】你們最喜歡說:示威者不就是連中年人/老人家都打,政見不同便打?不是暴徒是甚麼?
1. 請看完整片段/了解事情來龍去脈。每次均是該中年/老人先撩者賤,自衛&反擊也合理不過。
2. 政見不同便打?哦,有的。藍絲的士司機撞斷女子雙腿,連儂牆斬女記者至重傷,年輕男生手腳斬至見骨,咬掉議員耳朵,用刀捅路人夫婦至危殆等。他們才因為政見不同而產生極端仇恨,嚴重傷害他人身體吧?這些才是暴徒。
【砸/燒】 有關為甚麼示威者會破壞某店舖/鐵,坊間太多解釋。別懶,自己search一下好好看看。
另外,暴力行為當然無法帶來自由民主,藍絲知道就最好了,請收手。
(三)讀書有何用,都被煽動了,一定收了錢
【學歷高/有讀書】 你要別人相信那些發聲的大學生、老師、教授、醫生、護士、救護人員、公務員、律師、博士、碩士、社工等等都被煽動?還是學歷低的五毛藍絲才不懂明辨是非黑白?我相信大部分人都會認同後者較容易受煽動/不動腦吧。
【煽動】 那麼容易受煽動,你怎麼不煽動他們?
【收錢論】 若然當前線能夠收到那麼多錢,甚至買樓,就所有人都衝去當前線了。大眾只知道機場那記者收了十萬,撞人的士司機也收了五十二萬,黑警ot也收穫甚豐。
————————————————
好好想想。
你們支持毒打、虐待、甚至殺害示威者是多麼泯滅人性,
是有多蠢,才看不到誰在搞亂香港。
天真自私地認為這樣就能令香港回復繁榮穩定。
如果你們的子女/朋友/親人是示威者的話,
你們不配擁有他們。
[english version]
《To those who still blame protesters for destroying Hong Kong》
Common views of you guys:
(A)Regardless of your requests, just stop creating chaos in Hong Kong
You think protesters block roads and destroy public facilities/glass/MTR station facilities are the main reason/factor that lead to:
1. Traffic congestion/gridlok/early closure/temporarily closed of transportation
2. Not being able to come to work on time/ go out
3. Economic recession/distress
Not at all.
It’s only because you cannot see that:
1. Countless tear gas diffused in the air that air pollution will have a serious and prolonged negative effect on all Hong Kongers’ health.
2. Indiscriminate arrests & countless experiences of police brutality, you or your child/friends/family members may be the next target to face police misconduct and violence.
3. Freedom & rights are gradually tightening and vanishing, including rally, assembly and freedom of speech
4. No more private properties and place. For instances, residents kneeled down and let cops searched their body & even made arrest at lobby of their residential building. University campus turned into war zone , students are facing a massacre.
5. Some exits/ ticket machines/ gates of MTR weren’t destroyed. MTR was only cooperated/bowed to the regime.
etc.
Corrupted regime is the main reason of social instability / chaos. No matter you are retired/ rich enough / still working, please open your eyes and realise that this government which keeps turning a blind eye to public opinions & these crazy green terrorists who maltreat and kill Hongkongers, are those who create chaos in Hong Kong.
(B)Doing this can fight for /achieve freedom and democracy?(referring to scenes of protesters beat/hit/destroy/light fire)
No. But these rather radical measures only took place after protesters already tried & participated in numerous peaceful activities such as 1 & 2 million people peaceful rallies (6.9,6.16,8.18) , tens/hundreds of thousand people joined assemblies & assemblies of different industries, human chains, fold paper crane, sing songs, and still, the government ignored them & the escalating police violence & even when protesters are now deprived of rights to assembly and rally with or without Letter of No Objection.
【Hit/beat people】You guys always love to say, ‘Protesters beat middle-aged/elderly, and those who have different views. If they are not rioters, who are they?'
1. Please watch the whole, complete video/broadcast & find out the ins and outs first. Everytime that middle-aged/elderly provoked the fight, so it makes perfect sense for protesters/Hongkongers to fight back/self-defense/protect themselves.
2. Beating people with different political views? Oh, yes. The blue ribbon taxi driver drove to the crowd of protesters and hit a 23-year-old woman that her legs suffered serious fractures, another blue ribbon uncle stabed a young female reporters at lennon wall in Tseong Kwan O that she was severely injured , young boy being slashed with a knife which caused very deep wounds that he could not walk, bit off a ear of a district councillor, stabbed pedestrians at Taikoo etc. These blue ribbons are the ones who have maximum level of intense hatred towards protesters that they deliberately and insanely hurt other people. These are the real rioters.
【Destroy public facilities/ light fire】 Regarding why protesters destroy certain shops/MTR, there are plenty of explanations circulating around. Stop being lazybones, search them yourself and have a good read.
Besides, of course violence acts cannot bring freedom and democracy. It would be great if blue ribbons know, and please stop doing it.
(Three)What’s the use of studying? Students are being incited/stoked up/ they must have received money/benefits.
【Highly-educated/educated】 Don’t you think anyone with a clear mind would believe that those university students, teachers, professors , doctors, medical professionals, civil servants, lawyers, social workers etc. are being incited/instigated?Or rather, they would think that those 0.5/blue ribbons who are undereducated /less educated are easier to be deceived without knowing it? I believe the latter is more convincing.
【Stoke up】If it is that easy to incite anger/ persuade students/ young people/ any protester, why don’t you instigate them?
【Views of protesters receiving money/benefits to take part in the movement】 If being a frontline protesters can earn/receive that much money/benefits or even enough to buy a house, then everyone would be a frontline. The public only know that the reporter at the airport received RMB $100k, the taxi driver received $520k and the cops earn a great deal of money from working overtime.
————————————————
Please stop and think.
You guys lost your humanity when supporting the beatings, maltreating and even killing the protesters.
What an idiot you are to not being able to know & see who are ruining Hong Kong and creating all these chaos.
How selfish and naive for you to think that by hurting and arrest all protesters can let Hong Kong resume its stability and prosperity.
If your child/ friend/ relatives are one of the protesters,
you don’t deserve them.
———
Ig : Luetsicga
how serious is air pollution 在 Ηow air pollution affects our health 的相關結果
Air pollution is the single largest environmental health risk in Europe and a major cause of premature death and disease. ... <看更多>
how serious is air pollution 在 Air Pollution and Your Health 的相關結果
Air pollution exposure is associated with oxidative stress and inflammation in human cells, which may lay a foundation for chronic diseases and cancer. In 2013, ... ... <看更多>
how serious is air pollution 在 How air pollution is destroying our health 的相關結果
The health effects of air pollution are serious – one third of deaths from stroke, lung cancer and heart disease are due to air pollution. ... <看更多>