点击右上角
微信好友
朋友圈
请使用浏览器分享功能进行分享
元宵将至 贵州山区5629/30次“慢火车”带货忙******
(新春走基层)元宵将至 贵州山区5629/30次“慢火车”带货忙
中新网贵州桐梓2月3日电 题：元宵将至 贵州山区5629/30次“慢火车”带货忙
作者 瞿宏伦 肖珊
“按照我们的习俗，除了除夕，元宵节每家每户也要吃团圆饭，新鲜的蔬菜这几天供不应求。”2月3日，在贵州省遵义市汇川区境内的松坝站，村民冯光莲告诉记者，元宵节快到了，这几天通过5629/30次公益性“慢火车”带货的频率多了起来。
11时40分许，列车驶入松坝站，冯光莲和另外10多位村民背着自家种的白菜等农特产品早已在站台等候，他们将一起搭乘这趟“慢火车”前往遵义市桐梓县售卖蔬菜。
2月3日，贵州汇川，菜农在5630次“慢火车”“带货车厢”内售卖蔬菜。 瞿宏伦 摄这些村民是“慢火车”上的常客，被称为“背篓客”。他们背着新鲜的瓜果蔬菜、自家腌制的咸菜、自制手工艺品等从家门口坐“慢火车”前往县城集市售卖，同时采办一些生活用品后再坐“慢火车”返回。
车还没停稳，村民们就争先恐后的跑向最近的车厢排队等待上车。有的村民背篓太重、有的村民农特产品太多，在车站和列车工作人员的帮助下他们成功“挤”上了“带货车厢”，车厢内一角不一会就摆放了各类蔬菜，成了一个小型菜市场。
5629/30(贵州遵义开往重庆、重庆开往贵州遵义)次公益性“慢火车”(以下简称：5629/30次“慢火车”)串联着娄山关、红花园、桐梓等23个站点。目前是川黔铁路仅存的一趟旅客列车，最低票价6元人民币，是当地村民出行、做生意的重要交通工具。
2月3日，贵州汇川，5630次“慢火车”“带货车厢”。 瞿宏伦 摄松坝站是5629/30次“慢火车”停靠的五等小站，车站沿线多数村民都种植蔬菜售卖，是他们主要收入来源之一。将种植的蔬菜运出深山、帮助村民圆了“致富梦”的正是这趟“慢火车”。
“我们这里的村民都有种菜，蔬菜在村里面需求量不大，要带到外面去卖。”村民冯光莲告诉记者，花费7元钱坐着“慢火车”去县城售卖是最好的选择。“县城里的大多数人依旧喜欢从田间采摘的新鲜蔬菜，带的货不愁卖不出去。”
遵义车务段松坝站站长王溢是沿线村民的老朋友，和铁路沿线菜农都很熟悉，哪一家主要种什么他都清楚。
王溢说，“慢火车”虽然慢，但村民在家门口就可以上车，而且把蔬菜带上车还能节约运输成本，铁路沿线村民都选择用这趟“慢火车”带货。“马上就是元宵节了，这趟慢火车上的客流又慢慢多了起来，大家都赶着把农特产品带到县里去买。‘烟火气’持续回升，我们打心眼里高兴。”
据了解，为了满足村民多样化的出行需求，2022年7月18日，5629/30次“慢火车”升级为空调车，专设“带货车厢”，以方便村民将农特产品带上车售卖。有时遇到外出游玩的旅客，村民在车上就可以做起生意。
2月3日，贵州桐梓，列车工作人员帮助菜农在桐梓火车站下车。 瞿宏伦 摄“这趟‘慢火车’一直深受沿线村民的青睐。”遵义车务段党委副书记程书波介绍，近年来，5629/30次“慢火车”沿线村寨变化很大，铁路改变了村民们的家庭环境，让他们踏上了致富道路。
程书波表示，对很多人而言，“慢火车”已经成为一种记忆。但深山里的“慢火车”，仍在改善山区村民的出行环境，助力乡村振兴。
12时49分，列车到达桐梓站。车站工作人员帮村民们把背篓扶下车，大家拎着菜篮、背着货物快速地下车出站，迫不及待赶往市场……(完)
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. 
|
)