Climate talks between the world’s top 20 polluters have ended with an unusual level of agreement on the urgent need to tackle greenhouse gas emissions.

　　But 1 at the Mexico talks also stressed the massive gap between the politics and science of climate change. Several said they had never known such a positive atmosphere. Nobody 2 the reality of climate science anymore.

　　Business leaders from the World Economic Forum in Davos expressed a need for strong targets from governments on greenhouse gases. The International Energy Agency (IEA) said much could be achieved with existing technology, although far greater 3 was needed. The World Bank 4 its framework for investment in clean technology to help developing countries expand energy supplies without having to follow the 5 path of the West.

　　But bank representatives made it clear that there was no sign of the $20bn. (Z 10.1bn.) investment programme 6 by the U.K. Chancellor Gordon Brown previously. The U.S., which was present at the talks, was objecting to parts of the proposal. The Under-Secretary of State for Global Affairs, Paula Dobriansky, told the BBC that the U.S. was now acting urgently to tackle greenhouse gases—then later admitted that the country’s 7 would continue to rise.

　　Another U.S. delegate agreed that the world would face 8 sea-level rise because of climate change. But when 9 asked if the U.S. opposition to mandatory (强制的)C02 cuts had changed in any way in response to a surge in concern over recent science of climate change, the delegate 10 replied “no”. The U.S. is by no means the only sticking point in climate talks, however.

 A official

B  dirty

C. doubted

D. developed

E. outlined

F. raise

G. informally

H. emissions

I. invaluable

J. economically

K. delegates

L. thriftily

M. investment

N. inevitable

O. announced