| 查看: 925 | 回复: 1 | ||
| 本帖产生 1 个 翻译EPI ，点击这里进行查看 | ||
[求助]
英译中——投稿后审稿人的审稿意见（环境方面的）
|
||
|
1.In the case of water is this problem an extreme given its very low starting price. Non product output loses are in this case usually formed mainly by lost raw materials which become pollution. Given this observation I was missing in your policy review some more options like to increase price of the input materials (through their taxation) or to introduce additional pollution fee (in my opinion less effective policy option). 2.You exclude for example product modification and communication with customer which can be in this case often the most effective preventative technique. What is thrue（估计是true） is that these options are being explored only if there are significant difficulties (as result of new policies) to run the traditional process. Maybe you could consider to introduce at least some discussion on these topics. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
回收溶剂求助
已经有7人回复
-
职称评审没过，求安慰
已经有40人回复
-
硝基苯如何除去
已经有3人回复
-
A期刊撤稿
已经有4人回复
-
垃圾破二本职称评审标准
已经有17人回复
-
投稿Elsevier的Neoplasia杂志，到最后选publishing options时页面空白，不能完成投稿
已经有22人回复
-
申请26博士
已经有5人回复
-
EST投稿状态问题
已经有7人回复
-
毕业后当辅导员了，天天各种学生超烦
已经有4人回复
-
求助文献
已经有3人回复
zss99
金虫 (正式写手)
- 翻译EPI: 1
- 应助: 0 (幼儿园)
- 金币: 8740.6
- 帖子: 927
- 在线: 60.4小时
- 虫号: 564810
- 注册: 2008-05-28
- 性别: MM
- 专业: 基因组学
2楼2011-07-25 17:38:44