保障粮食供给 端牢中国饭碗******
农业基础地位任何时候都不能忽视和削弱，手中有粮、心中不慌在任何时候都是真理
始终绷紧粮食安全这根弦，牢牢把住粮食安全主动权，努力构建更高层次、更高质量、更有效率、更可持续的粮食安全保障体系
山东省东营市河口区地处黄河入海口，盐碱地多达69.72万亩。近年来，当地依托科技创新，在良种培育、盐碱地种植等方面下功夫，打造国家级耐盐碱种业应用示范区，大豆新品种“齐黄34”实现平均亩产329.3公斤。良种良法配套，农机农艺融合，科技种田为粮食稳产保供提供了有力支撑，让乡亲们日子越过越红火。
粮食安全是“国之大者”。对我们这样一个有着14亿多人口的大国来说，国家粮食安全了，实现经济发展、社会稳定、国家安全才有基础；农业基础地位任何时候都不能忽视和削弱，手中有粮、心中不慌在任何时候都是真理。
党的十八大以来，各地区各部门把确保重要农产品特别是粮食供给作为首要任务，各项举措扎实有效，广大农民辛勤耕耘，大国粮仓根基稳固。粮食产量连续8年站稳1.3万亿斤台阶，谷物基本自给、口粮绝对安全，粮食和重要农产品供给稳定……来之不易的丰收答卷，是政策好、科技强、人努力等多种因素共同作用的结果。
今天，我们牢牢把住了粮食安全的主动权，中国特色粮食安全之路越走越稳健。但也应清醒看到，当前，百年变局和世纪疫情相互交织，全球粮食产业链供应链不确定风险增加，我国粮食产需在今后相当长的时期内仍将处于紧平衡态势。同时，随着我国经济高质量发展和城镇化推进，粮食等重要农产品需求仍呈刚性增长态势，保障国家粮食安全压力更大、任务更重。面向未来，我们必须未雨绸缪，始终绷紧粮食安全这根弦，牢牢把住粮食安全主动权，努力构建更高层次、更高质量、更有效率、更可持续的粮食安全保障体系，以国内稳产保供的确定性来应对外部环境的不确定性。
要把提高农业综合生产能力放在更加突出的位置，紧紧抓住耕地和种子两个要害。耕地是粮食生产的命根子。我国耕地家底并不丰厚，以占世界9%的耕地，养活世界近20%的人口，人地关系紧张是基本国情。坚决守住18亿亩耕地红线，逐步把永久基本农田全部建成高标准农田，才能把有限的耕地资源用足用好。种子是农业的“芯片”。我国农业科技进步有目共睹，但也存在短板，其中最大的短板就是种子。种源安全关系到国家安全，下决心把我国种业搞上去，才能实现种业科技自立自强、种源自主可控。新征程上，深入实施藏粮于地、藏粮于技战略，实行最严格的耕地保护制度，打好种业翻身仗，方能不断夯实粮食生产物质基础，持续巩固和提高粮食生产能力。
保障粮食供给，还要着力调动农民和政府“两个积极性”。发展粮食生产，主体是种粮农民。近年来，从落实国家稻谷补贴、实际种粮农民一次性补贴、农机购置补贴等政策，到稳步提高稻谷小麦最低收购价水平，再到推动三大主粮完全成本保险和种植收入保险实现主产省产粮大县全覆盖……一系列好政策进村下田，稳预期、增效益，激发了农民种粮积极性。悠悠万事，吃饭为大。保证粮食安全，大家都有责任，党政同责要真正见效。严格考核，督促各地真正把保障粮食安全的责任扛起来，才能更好稳住粮食安全这块“压舱石”。新征程上，我们要健全种粮农民收益保障机制，健全主产区利益补偿机制，确保种粮农民合理收益、全面落实粮食安全党政同责，把中国人的饭碗牢牢端在自己手中。
减少粮食损耗是保障粮食安全的重要途径。据联合国粮农组织统计，每年全球粮食从生产到零售全环节损失约占世界粮食产量的14%。在我国，粮食生产仅“三夏”小麦机收环节减损1个百分点，就可挽回25亿斤粮食。减损就是增产，降耗就是增收。中办、国办印发的《粮食节约行动方案》明确，到2025年，粮食全产业链各环节节粮减损举措更加硬化实化细化，推动节粮减损取得更加明显成效。与此同时，还要树立大食物观，构建多元化食物供给体系，多途径开发食物来源。新征程上，我们要在增产和减损两端同时发力，持续推进食物节约各项行动，不断提高粮食安全保障水平。
党的二十大报告提出，“全方位夯实粮食安全根基”。立足自身抓好农业生产，坚决筑牢国家粮食安全防线、全方位夯实粮食安全根基，一定能让“中国饭碗”装得更满、端得更牢、成色更足，为稳定经济社会大局筑牢坚实基础。（本报评论部）
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.
| 小米彩票地图 |
