美使馆的环境数据是给美国社区的，其它人别打了鸡血似瞎 ...

美使馆的环境数据是给美国社区的，其它人别打了鸡血似瞎起哄

就中国投诉美使馆私自提供的环境数据不准确和有违国际公约，美国务院新闻发言人回应如下：
数据是提供给在中国的美国社区参考的（因为美各大城市都有此数据），采集数据源是只有一个点，这只是我们提供给在中国的美国社区的一个户外活动的安全参考（其它人真别像打了鸡血似的瞎起哄）。
我们不会停止，中国驻美机构也可发布。

---

以下是一些引申，非翻译。
在华的美国社区是什么概念？是不是只要爱美国，都能算是在华美国社区的一分子？

---

稍候媒体节译:
记者：你认为发布天气报告没有干涉中国内政？

美国国务院副发言人唐纳：不，我们不这么认为。

记者：你也不认为这违背了维也纳公约？

美国国务院副发言人唐纳：当然不认为。这是为美国人提供的服务，那些在大使馆社区工作和生活在中国的美国人。

唐纳表示，美国不会因为中国的指责就停止发布数据。他还称，如果中国也发布美国城市的空气质量数据，美国不会反对。

美国国务院副发言人唐纳：美国已经开始在一些美国城市公布数据。我们不会反对(中国公布美国城市数据)。
http://news.163.com/12/0606/10/83AE40G40001121M.html

---

QUESTION: Oh, well there’s so much going on today. All right. Let’s start with clearly what is the most important issue, and that is the latest chaos between you guys and the Chinese over the most important issue of air quality.

MR. TONER: Wow. That’s the most important issue?

QUESTION: Yeah. I’m thinking that it might be the most. Have you – has the Embassy heard the – received any formal complaints about its Twitter feed of this – of the air quality, and are you planning to shut it down?

MR. TONER: Matt, we are aware at the June 5th press briefing by Chinese spokespersons – their equivalent, I guess – that they did make a statement about foreign embassies that release environmental information were violating Chinese internal affairs. You know what we do at the U.S. Embassy and other various consulates throughout China. We provide the American community, both our Embassy and consulate personnel, as well as the American community writ large, information it can use to make better daily decisions regarding the safety of outdoor activities. We do this via these PM 2.5 – I’m sorry – monitors that look at PM 2.5 pollution. And this is, frankly, something that Americans – or data or information that Americans get in U.S. cities every day.

QUESTION: All right. So you don’t think it’s a violation of the Chinese internal affairs to --

MR. TONER: We do not.

QUESTION: -- basically release a weather report?

MR. TONER: We do not.

QUESTION: No? And you don’t think that it’s a violation of the Vienna Conventions?

MR. TONER: Most certainly, we do not. I mean, again, this is a service that we provide to Americans, both who work in the Embassy community as well as Americans who live in China. And again, this is a service we’re all well aware that exists in many U.S. cities. Air pollution, quite frankly, is a problem in many cities and regions in China. So --

QUESTION: And just to wrap it up then.

MR. TONER: Yeah.

QUESTION: And so you have no plans to stop?

MR. TONER: We do not.

QUESTION: I have a follow-up on that one.

MR. TONER: Yeah. Sure.

QUESTION: Can you tell me – does the U.S. provide a similar service in other polluted capitals --

MR. TONER: By the way, just to go back, I’m not an expert in Vienna Convention, but I’m pretty sure that this is no violation of the Vienna Convention.

QUESTION: Then you don’t think that– when was the Vienna Convention signed? What, 19 --

MR. TONER: That they had pollution monitors? I don’t think so. They probably needed them, but --

QUESTION: Does the U.S. provide similar services in other embassies in cities which might be polluted?

MR. TONER: You know what? I can take that question. I believe that we may do that. I don’t have an answer for you though.

QUESTION: Okay. If you can check on that. And do you know in China, other than the Embassy Beijing, are the similar readouts provided for sites from U.S. consulates?

MR. TONER: We do. Well, in Shanghai, the Shanghai Environmental Protection Bureau publishes PM 10 data and air quality readings from multiple monitors, while the U.S. Shanghai consulate publishes PM 2.5 data and air quality recordings from one monitor. So these are different – they measure different parameters and indices. In Guangzhou, again, we also have a – we also publish the same PM 2.5 data.

QUESTION: Okay. How about Chengdu?

MR. TONER: That is a good question. I would say, yes.

QUESTION: Okay. Do you know yes or are you just saying yes?

MR. TONER: But I don’t have that in front of me. If that’s wrong, I’ll let you know.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: You wouldn’t have any problem with the Chinese doing a similar – something similar here?

MR. TONER: Not at all. But again, I mean, what we do in China is – I mean, these are different standards the way we measure this. So this is something we already provide, as I said, in many American cities. But no, we have no objections.

QUESTION: Mark, is it --

QUESTION: But why isn’t it --

MR. TONER: Yeah. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Well, I was just saying that one of the chief Chinese complaints about it is that they say that since it’s – in Embassy Beijing case, since it’s only data collected from one monitoring instrument, that it’s not very scientific and that it doesn’t get sort of – they’re claiming it as sort of specious data that’s being used to whack them. Do you think that it’s scientifically sort of valid to deliver air pollution reports on the basis of one monitor?

MR. TONER: Well, I think we admit that these are from – data from a single monitor, but this is just information that we provide to the American community so that they can make decisions based on safety of outdoor activities. But we freely acknowledge that these are single monitors.

Yeah. Go ahead, Jill. Go ahead, and then I’ll --

QUESTION: Just to clarify. This has not come up before? Is this the first time they’ve ever made a complaint about this?

MR. TONER: I’ll take that question as well. They – I’m not sure whether there’s been similar, kind of, public statements about it. I don’t know.
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/06/191782.htm

美使馆的环境数据是给美国社区的，其它人别打了鸡血似瞎起哄

就中国投诉美使馆私自提供的环境数据不准确和有违国际公约，美国务院新闻发言人回应如下：
数据是提供给在中国的美国社区参考的（因为美各大城市都有此数据），采集数据源是只有一个点，这只是我们提供给在中国的美国社区的一个户外活动的安全参考（其它人真别像打了鸡血似的瞎起哄）。
我们不会停止，中国驻美机构也可发布。

---

以下是一些引申，非翻译。
在华的美国社区是什么概念？是不是只要爱美国，都能算是在华美国社区的一分子？

---

稍候媒体节译:
记者：你认为发布天气报告没有干涉中国内政？

美国国务院副发言人唐纳：不，我们不这么认为。

记者：你也不认为这违背了维也纳公约？

美国国务院副发言人唐纳：当然不认为。这是为美国人提供的服务，那些在大使馆社区工作和生活在中国的美国人。

唐纳表示，美国不会因为中国的指责就停止发布数据。他还称，如果中国也发布美国城市的空气质量数据，美国不会反对。

美国国务院副发言人唐纳：美国已经开始在一些美国城市公布数据。我们不会反对(中国公布美国城市数据)。
http://news.163.com/12/0606/10/83AE40G40001121M.html

---

QUESTION: Oh, well there’s so much going on today. All right. Let’s start with clearly what is the most important issue, and that is the latest chaos between you guys and the Chinese over the most important issue of air quality.

MR. TONER: Wow. That’s the most important issue?

QUESTION: Yeah. I’m thinking that it might be the most. Have you – has the Embassy heard the – received any formal complaints about its Twitter feed of this – of the air quality, and are you planning to shut it down?

MR. TONER: Matt, we are aware at the June 5th press briefing by Chinese spokespersons – their equivalent, I guess – that they did make a statement about foreign embassies that release environmental information were violating Chinese internal affairs. You know what we do at the U.S. Embassy and other various consulates throughout China. We provide the American community, both our Embassy and consulate personnel, as well as the American community writ large, information it can use to make better daily decisions regarding the safety of outdoor activities. We do this via these PM 2.5 – I’m sorry – monitors that look at PM 2.5 pollution. And this is, frankly, something that Americans – or data or information that Americans get in U.S. cities every day.

QUESTION: All right. So you don’t think it’s a violation of the Chinese internal affairs to --

MR. TONER: We do not.

QUESTION: -- basically release a weather report?

MR. TONER: We do not.

QUESTION: No? And you don’t think that it’s a violation of the Vienna Conventions?

MR. TONER: Most certainly, we do not. I mean, again, this is a service that we provide to Americans, both who work in the Embassy community as well as Americans who live in China. And again, this is a service we’re all well aware that exists in many U.S. cities. Air pollution, quite frankly, is a problem in many cities and regions in China. So --

QUESTION: And just to wrap it up then.

MR. TONER: Yeah.

QUESTION: And so you have no plans to stop?

MR. TONER: We do not.

QUESTION: I have a follow-up on that one.

MR. TONER: Yeah. Sure.

QUESTION: Can you tell me – does the U.S. provide a similar service in other polluted capitals --

MR. TONER: By the way, just to go back, I’m not an expert in Vienna Convention, but I’m pretty sure that this is no violation of the Vienna Convention.

QUESTION: Then you don’t think that– when was the Vienna Convention signed? What, 19 --

MR. TONER: That they had pollution monitors? I don’t think so. They probably needed them, but --

QUESTION: Does the U.S. provide similar services in other embassies in cities which might be polluted?

MR. TONER: You know what? I can take that question. I believe that we may do that. I don’t have an answer for you though.

QUESTION: Okay. If you can check on that. And do you know in China, other than the Embassy Beijing, are the similar readouts provided for sites from U.S. consulates?

MR. TONER: We do. Well, in Shanghai, the Shanghai Environmental Protection Bureau publishes PM 10 data and air quality readings from multiple monitors, while the U.S. Shanghai consulate publishes PM 2.5 data and air quality recordings from one monitor. So these are different – they measure different parameters and indices. In Guangzhou, again, we also have a – we also publish the same PM 2.5 data.

QUESTION: Okay. How about Chengdu?

MR. TONER: That is a good question. I would say, yes.

QUESTION: Okay. Do you know yes or are you just saying yes?

MR. TONER: But I don’t have that in front of me. If that’s wrong, I’ll let you know.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: You wouldn’t have any problem with the Chinese doing a similar – something similar here?

MR. TONER: Not at all. But again, I mean, what we do in China is – I mean, these are different standards the way we measure this. So this is something we already provide, as I said, in many American cities. But no, we have no objections.

QUESTION: Mark, is it --

QUESTION: But why isn’t it --

MR. TONER: Yeah. Go ahead.

QUESTION: Well, I was just saying that one of the chief Chinese complaints about it is that they say that since it’s – in Embassy Beijing case, since it’s only data collected from one monitoring instrument, that it’s not very scientific and that it doesn’t get sort of – they’re claiming it as sort of specious data that’s being used to whack them. Do you think that it’s scientifically sort of valid to deliver air pollution reports on the basis of one monitor?

MR. TONER: Well, I think we admit that these are from – data from a single monitor, but this is just information that we provide to the American community so that they can make decisions based on safety of outdoor activities. But we freely acknowledge that these are single monitors.

Yeah. Go ahead, Jill. Go ahead, and then I’ll --

QUESTION: Just to clarify. This has not come up before? Is this the first time they’ve ever made a complaint about this?

MR. TONER: I’ll take that question as well. They – I’m not sure whether there’s been similar, kind of, public statements about it. I don’t know.
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/06/191782.htm