GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
10:11 Sep 16, 2013 |
|
English language (monolingual) [Non-PRO] Energy / Power Generation | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Selected response from: polyglot45 | ||||||
Grading comment
|
SUMMARY OF ALL EXPLANATIONS PROVIDED | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
4 +10 | to be used a) to compare among projects and b) to compare against no action |
|
Discussion entries: 4 | |
---|---|
to be used a) to compare among projects and b) to compare against no action Explanation: Comprehensively covering these impact channels allows the assessment to be put to use both to compare across different IPP projects, for example to identify best practices in engaging the local community, and to compare against the case where no new power plant is built at all It meants that these potential types of impact, if studied comprehensively, can serve 2 purposes : one to compare the different projects and the other to compare against not going ahead. Si l'on tient compte de tous les différents élements, l'on devrait pouvoir mesurer les différents projets les uns par rapport aux autres (par exemple....) et l'on devrait également pouvoir comparer les différentes options par rapport aux résultats d'une non intervention. Je ne vous offre pas la traduction, juste l'explication. Le 'both' se rapporte à ce qui suit.... |
| |
Grading comment
| ||