The old story about climate protection is that it's costly, or it would have been done already. So government needs to make us do something painful to fix it. The new story about climate protection is that it's not costly, but profitable. This was a simple sign error, because it's cheaper to save fuel than to buy fuel, as is well known to companies that do it all the time -- for example, Dupont, SD micro electronics. Many other firms -- IBM -- are reducing their energy intensity routinely six percent a year by fixing up their plants, and they get their money back in two or three years. That's called a profit.
按以前的说法,气候保护是个费钱的差事 要不然的话早就着手做了。 所以政府需要我们做点牺牲来来搞定它。 现在对气候保护有个新看法 它不仅不花钱,而且还能盈利。 这是一个简单的符号误差 原因就在于,省油比买油要便宜, 众所周知,很多企业也都一直这样做。 比如,杜邦,SD微电子。 很多其他公司,像是IBM,正在降低他们的能源密集度, 通过改进他们的工厂,每年一般能减少6%的消耗 两到三年内就能收回投资。½ 这就是盈利。
Now, similarly, the old story about oil is that if we wanted to save very much of it, it would be expensive, or we would have done it already, because markets are essentially perfect. If, of course, that were true, there would be no innovation, and nobody could make any money. But the new story about oil is the government doesn't have to force us to do painful things to get off oil -- not just incrementally, but completely -- quite the contrary. The United States, for example, can completely eliminate its use of oil and rejuvenate the economy at the same time, led by business for profit, because it's so much cheaper to save and substitute for the oil than to keep on buying it. This process will also be catalyzed by the military for its own reasons of combat effectiveness and preventing conflict, particularly over oil.
现在,对于石油我们有着同样的老看法。如果我们想节约石油 那就要花很多钱,要不我们早就成功了, 因为市场基本完善。 当然,如果这种说法是真的,那这个世界上就不会有创新了, 也没有人能赚到钱了。 但是现在对石油有个新看法 政府不用再强迫我们来痛苦地戒掉石油 这里说的不仅是逐步减少使用,而是彻底地 在全国范围内停止使用石油。比如说,在美国 能够做到完全不用石油 还能同时促进经济发展, 创造商业利润, 因为比起继续买石油,节约和寻找替代燃料 要便宜得多。 这一过程同样需要由军队来合作加以推动 因为他们有着强大的战斗力和防止冲突的能力 尤其是在石油问题上。
This thesis is set out in a book called "Winning the Oil Endgame" that four colleagues and I wrote and have posted for free at Oilendgame.com -- about 170,000 downloads so far. And it was co-sponsored by the Pentagon -- it's independent, it's peer-reviewed and all of the backup calculations are transparently posted for your perusal. Now, a bit of economic history, I think, may be helpful here. Around 1850, one of the biggest U.S. industries was whaling. And whale oil lit practically every building. But in the nine years before Drake struck oil, in 1859, at least five-sixths of that whale oil-illuminating market disappeared, thanks to fatal competitors, chiefly oil and gas made from coal, to which the whalers had not been paying attention. So, very unexpectedly, they ran out of customers before they ran out of whales. The remnant whale populations were saved by technological innovators and profit-maximizing capitalists.
这个论点是在《赢下石油之战的最后博弈》中提出的 这本书是我和四个同事共同编写, 而且大家可以在Oilendgame.com上找到免费资源。 目前差不多有17万人下载过。 这本书由Pentagon监制 独立发行,经过了同行评审 所有的备份数据都是透明的,公开的,大家可以去查阅。 现在讲一点经济史,也许会对大家有所帮助。 1850年左右,捕鲸是美国最大的产业之一。 几乎所有建筑燃料都是鲸油。 但是在1859年,美国第一口油井开采九年之前, 由于煤油和煤气的竞争,以鲸油为燃料的照明市场受到致命打击, 至少六分之五的目标市场被抢。 之前捕鲸者并没有注意到这些对手。 因此,他们万万没想到,鲸鱼还能猎杀, 客户群跑光了。 科技创新和追求最大利润的资本家救了 那些漏网鲸鱼。
(Laughter)
(笑~~)
And it's funny -- it feels a bit like this now for oil. We've been spending the last few decades accumulating a very powerful backlog of technologies for saving and substituting for oil, and no one had bothered to add them up before. So when we did, we found some very surprising things. Now, there are two big reasons to be concerned about oil. Both national competitiveness and national security are at risk. On the competitiveness front, we all know that Toyota has more market cap than the big three put together. And serious competition from Europe, from Korea, and next is China, which will soon be a major net exporter of cars. How long do you think it will take before you can drive home your new wally-badged Shanghai automotive super-efficient car? Maybe a decade, according to my friends in Detroit. China has an energy policy based on radical energy efficiency and leap-frog technology. They're not going to export your uncle's Buick.
并且十分有趣的是——感觉有点像现在的石油 我们过去已经花了几十年的时间 积累了非常强大的技术力量 用于节约石油和探索替代燃料 在以前没人费心去探讨这些问题 所以我们研究时就有了惊人的的发现。 如今,石油问题越来越突出,有两大方面。 即:国家竞争力威胁和国家安全威胁。 从竞争力角度讲, 我们都知道,丰田的市场占有率比三大美国汽车商总和还高 还有其他强有力的竞争对手,来自欧洲的,韩国的, 接下来还会有中国,因为它很快就会成为主要的汽车净出口国。© 你觉得还得用多长时间,你就会开着 上海生产的汽车回家?这种车品质一流,超级省油。 在底特律的朋友说,也许要十年。 中国出台一项能源政策 该政策以全新的高效能源和跨越式的技术作为基础。 他们不会出口大排量车。
And after that comes India. The point here is, these cars are going to be made super efficient. The question is, who will make them? Will we in the United States continue to import efficient cars to replace foreign oil, or will we make efficient cars and import neither the oil nor the cars? That seems to make more sense. The more we keep on using the oil, particularly the imported oil, the more we face a very obvious array of problems. Our analysis assumes that they all cost nothing, but nothing is not the right number. It could well be enough to double the oil price, for example. And one of the worst of these is what it does to our standing in the world if other countries think that everything we do is about oil, if we have to treat countries that have oil differently than countries that don't have oil.
而之后还会有来自印度的竞争。 关键的一点,这些车都会非常省油。 问题只是谁来制造它们。 我们美国会不会继续以进口节能汽车来代替进口石油 或者我们自己制造节能汽车,不再进口石油,也不再进口汽车。 这样做看起来更有意义 未来我们使用的石油越多,尤其是进口石油 我们所面临的问题将会越严重。 我们在分析中假设它们都没有什么成本 并不是说真的没有成本 比如,这可能足以使汽油的价格上涨一倍 其中最糟的事情之一就是 它会对我们在世界上的地位造成什么影响 如果其他国家认为我们所做的一切只是为了获得石油 如果我们不得不把那些石油国 和那些非石油国区别对待
And our military get quite unhappy with having to stand guard on pipelines in Far-off-istan when what they actually signed up for was to protect American citizens. They don't like fighting over oil, they don't like being in the sands and they don't like where the oil money goes and what sort of instability it creates. Now, in order to avoid these problems, whatever you think they're worth, it's actually not that complicated. We can save half the oil by using it more efficiently, at a cost of 12 dollars per saved barrel. And then we can replace the other half with a combination of advanced bio-fuels and safe natural gas. And that costs on average under 18 dollars a barrel. And compared with the official forecast, that oil will cost 26 dollars a barrel in 2025, which is half of what we've been paying lately,
我们的军队会十分不高兴 因为他们不得不驻守在遥远的伊斯坦前线。 因为他们参军的真正意义 在于保卫美国人民 他们不喜欢为了石油而战 他们不喜欢生活在沙漠里 他们不喜欢那些卖油的地方 以及由此产生的那些不安定状况 如今,为了避免这些问题 不管你怎样想,它们都物有所值,实际上也没有那么复杂。 通过更高效的使用方式,我们可以节省一半的石油, 每桶油节省12美元。 然后我们可以将另外半桶油 用先进生物燃料和安全天然气的混合物来代替。 每桶油的平均成本不到18美元 相比之下官方的预测是 到2025年这样的混合油成本为26美元 比现在的价格降低了一半
that will save 70 billion dollars a year, starting quite soon. Now, in order to do this we need to invest about 180 billion dollars: half of it to retool the car, truck and plane industries; half of it to build the advanced bio-fuel industry. In the process, we will gain about a million good jobs, mainly rural. And protect another million jobs now at risk, mainly in auto-making. And we'll also get returns over 150 billion dollars a year. So that's a very handsome return. It's financeable in the private capital market. But if you want it for the reasons I just mentioned, to happen sooner and with higher confidence, then -- and also to expand choice and manage risk -- then you might like some light-handed public policies that support rather than distorting or opposing the business logic. And these policies work fine without taxes, subsidies or mandates. They make a little net money for the treasury.
尽快着手,每年我们将省下700亿美元 现在,为了实现这一计划,我们需要大约1800亿美元的投资 其中有一半用来重新装备汽车,卡车和飞机工业。 一半用来创建先进的生物燃料工业。 在这一过程中,有100万个好的就业机会集中产生在农村。 并能保住另外100万个岌岌可危的岗位,这些岗位主要集中在汽车制造业。 而且每年我们还能收回超过1500亿美元的投资 所以这是一个很可观的回报 在私有资本主义市场上它有着很强的融资能力 如果你听了我的解释后想要加入, 那就信心百倍地赶紧加入吧, ——当然,同时要扩大选择范围,并且要评估风险—— 然后你可能会喜欢一些宽松的公共政策 这些政策并不扭曲或反对商业逻辑,而是对此表示赞同。 这些政策行之有效,无税收,补贴和指令干涉。 它们能为国库产生一些净收益
They have a broad trans-ideological appeal, and because we want them actually to happen, we figured out ways to do them that do not require much, if any, federal legislation, and can, indeed, be done administratively or at a state level. Just to illustrate what to do about the nub of the problem, namely, light vehicles, here are four ultra-light carbon-composite concept cars with low drag, and all but the one at the upper left have hybrid drive. You can sort of have it all with these things. For example, this Opel two-seater does 155 miles an hour at 94 miles a gallon. This muscle car from Toyota: 408 horsepower in an ultra-light that does zero to 60 in well under four seconds, and still gets 32 miles a gallon. I'll say more later about this.
不论对哪个意识形态,它都有着广泛的吸引力。 因为我们希望这一切成为现实 我们已经想好了怎样去做 我们要求不多,如果有的话,就是联邦立法。 并能确确实实地落实在行政上或州级政策上。 刚才只是说明了核心问题应该怎么办, 也就是,制造轻型车辆 这里有4个超轻型碳复合材料低阻力的概念车, 除了左上角的,都有混合动力驱动 可以说,你可以拥有上面提到的一切 比如说这个双座的欧宝车 每小时行驶155英里的话,一加仑油能跑94英里 这个是丰田的超轻型强力车型,408马力 很轻易就能在四秒内从0码加速到60码 一加仑油仍然能跑32公里。一会我再说这个
And in the upper left, a pioneering effort 14 years ago by GM -- 84 miles a gallon without even using a hybrid, in a four-seater. Well, saving that fuel, 69 percent of the fuel in light vehicles costs about 57 cents per saved gallon. But it's even a better deal for heavy trucks, where you save a similar amount at 25 cents a gallon, with better aerodynamics and tires and engines, and so on, and taking out weight so you can put it into payload. So you can double efficiency with a 60 percent internal rate of return. Then you can go even further, almost tripling efficiency with some operational improvements, double the big haulers' margins. And we intend to use those numbers to create demand pull, and flip the market.
左上角的这个,是通用汽车14年前的先驱之作 即使在没有混合动力,四个座的情况下,每加仑能跑84英里 那么,按节省燃料算,轻型汽车能节省69% 每节省一加仑成本大约是57美分 但是,重型卡车的话会更划算 节省的燃料差不多,每加仑只需25美分 还有更先进的空气动力,轮胎和引擎等。 还解决了重量问题,因此你可以把它算进载重量 所以它的内部收益率为60%,能够取得双重效益 然后你可以更进一步,改善经营运作 将效益再提高一倍 大的运输商利润能翻一番 我们打算利用这些数字,拉动需求,扭转市场趋势
In the airplane business, it's again a similar story where the first 20 percent fuel saving is free, as Boeing is now demonstrating in its new Dreamliner. But then the next generation of planes saves about half. Again, much cheaper than buying the fuel. And if you go over the next 15 years or so to a blended-wing body, kind of a flying wing with internal engines, then you get about a factor three efficiency improvement at comparable or lower cost. Let me focus a minute on the light vehicles, the cars and light trucks, because we all know the most about those; probably everybody here drives one. And yet we may not realize that in a standard sedan, of all the fuel energy you feed into the car, seven-eighths never gets to the wheels; it's lost first in the engine, idling at zero miles a gallon, the power train and accessories.
在航空业务方面,情况也是这样的。 最初的节省的20%的燃料需要投入资金 比如像现在波音公司新的梦幻客机 但是下一代的飞机大约能节省一半。 同样,比购买燃料便宜多了 如果你仔细审视一下未来15年,或者是所谓的混合翼结构 就是那种有内置引擎的机翼 那么你就有可能以相对较低的成本 把你的效益提高三倍 下面我用一分钟来集中谈一下轻型汽车,轿车和轻型卡车。 由于我们对这三种车型比较熟悉 在座的可能都是开着这几种车来的 然而我们可能没有意识到,在标准汽车内部 你给车加的那些油的能量 八分之七都没用在车轮子上 首先,浪费在引擎内部,还没起步, 动力系统和配件就费了一加仑油
So then of the energy that does get to the wheels, only an eighth of it, half of that, goes to heat the tires on the road, or to heat the air the car pushes aside. And only this little bit, only six percent actually ends up accelerating the car and then heating the brakes when you stop. In fact, since 95 percent of the weight you're moving is the car not the driver, less than one percent of the fuel energy ends up moving the driver. This is not very gratifying after more than a century of devoted engineering effort.
接着能量才开始驱动车轮 只占总能量的1/8,其中一半还转化为轮胎摩擦地面的热量 或者是汽车排放的热气 只有这一点点,只有百分之六的能量 在实际上起到了汽车加速的作用 然后在刹车时转化为热量 事实上,由于车体的重量占了总重量的95%, 只有不到1%的燃料能量是用在载人上的 这可让人们不满意, 因为我们为改进技术忙活了100多年
(Laughter)
笑~~
(Applause)
掌声
Moreover, three-fourths of the fuel use is caused by the weight of the car. And it's obvious from the diagram that every unit of energy you save at the wheels is going to avoid wasting another seven units of energy getting that energy to the wheels. So there's huge leverage for making the car a lot lighter. And the reason this has not been very seriously examined before is there was a common assumption in the industry that -- well, then it might not be safe if you got whacked by a heavy car, and it would cost a lot more to make, because the only way we know how to make cars much lighter was to use expensive light metals like aluminum and magnesium. But these objections are now vanishing through advances in materials.
此外,四分之三的燃料都耗费在车体重量上 从图表中明显可以看出大家省的那一份油都省在车轮上了 接下来我们要把浪费掉的另外七份省出来 都用到车轮子上 因此汽车大幅减重是一个十分重要的方面 而之前没有认真研究这一点是因为 在这一行有一个不成文的假设-- 就是,如果被重车撞了,车轻了会很不安全, 这样就需要花费更高的成本 因为我们所知道的,减轻车重的唯一方法 就是使用像镁、铝这样的昂贵轻金属 但随着材料的进步这些都已经不成问题了
For example, we use a lot of carbon-fiber composites in sporting goods. And it turns out that these are quite remarkable for safety. Here's a handmade McLaren SLR carbon car that got t-boned by a Golf. The Golf was totaled. The McLaren just popped off and scratched the side panel. They'll pop it back on and fix the scratch later. But if this McLaren were to run into a wall at 65 miles an hour, the entire crash energy would be absorbed by a couple of woven carbon-fiber composite cones, weighing a total of 15 pounds, hidden in the front end. Because these materials could actually absorb six to 12 times as much energy per pound as steel, and do so a lot more smoothly.
比如,我们使用了大量的碳纤维复合材料 制造体育用品。 而事实证明这些都是十分安全的 这里是手工的迈凯轮单反碳纤维车,拥有高尔夫的T型骨架 高尔夫没玩明白 迈凯轮也出局了,仅仅抓住了其中的一点皮毛。 相信不久,它们会重新进入这一领域,弥补他们的损失。 但是如果迈凯轮的这款车以65英里的时速撞到墙上 碰撞产生的全部能量都会被 一对有碳纤维复合编织而成的锥体所吸收 它重达15磅,隐藏在车体前端 因为在现实中每磅这样的材料吸收的 能量,比同重量的钢铁要高出5到11倍 而且要平稳顺利的多
And this means we've just cracked the conundrum of safety and weight. We could make cars bigger, which is protective, but make them light. Whereas if we made them heavy, they'd be both hostile and inefficient. And when you make them light in the right way, that can be simpler and cheaper to make. You can end up saving money, and lives, and oil, all at the same time. I showed here two years ago a little bit about a design of your basic, uncompromised, quintupled-efficiency suburban-assault vehicle -- (Laughter) -- and this is a complete virtual design that is production-costed manufacturable.
这意味着我们刚刚破获了安全和重量的难题。 我们可以把汽车造的更大,更安全,但要减轻重量 如果我们把车造的很沉,只会碍手碍脚,效率降低。 如果我们用正确的方式来减轻车重 汽车制造将会变得更简单,成本更低。 同时,你不用再为省钱省油省时间发愁了 两年前我就多多少少提到过 一款你必不可少,不折不扣的, 五倍车速郊区突击车。 (笑~~) 而且这是一个完整的视觉设计 属于生产制造成本。
And the process needed to make it is actually coming toward the market quite nicely. We figured out a kind of a digital inkjet printer for this very stiff, strong, carbon-composite material, and then ways to thermoform it, because it's a combination of carbon and nylon, into whatever complex shapes you want, like the one just shown at the auto show by one of the tier-one suppliers. And the manufacturing you can do this way gets radically simplified. Because the auto body has only, say, 14 parts, instead of 100, 150. Each one is formed by one fairly cheap die set, instead of four expensive ones for stamping steel. Each of the parts can be easily lifted with no hoist. They snap together like a kid's toy. So you got rid of the body shop.
而且制造过程 正在逐渐与市场很好地结合起来。 我们设计出一种数字喷墨打印机 专门配合这种非常坚固的,高强度的碳复合材料, 然后再把它们加热, 因为这它是碳和尼龙的结合物, 因此你可以把它做成各种你想要的复杂形状, 不久前一个一线供应商在车展上展示的就是其中一例。 通过这种方式,你可以从根本上使制造方式简单化。 因为这样的车身仅需14个部分,而不再是100,150个零件 每一部分都由一套相当便宜的成套模具组成, 而不是四个昂贵的冲压钢。 不用起重机就能很容易地吊起来每一部分。 它们扣合在一起就像小孩垒积木一样 你就再也不用去汽车修理厂了
And if you want, you can lay color in the mold, and get rid of the paint shop. Those are the two hardest and costliest parts of making a car. So you end up with at least two-fifths lower capital intensity than the leanest plant in the industry, which GM has in Lansing. The plant also gets smaller. Now, when you go through a similar analysis for every way we use oil, including buildings, industry, feedstocks and so on, you find that of the 28 million barrels a day the government says we will need in 2025, well, about eight of that can be removed by efficiency by then, with another seven still being saved as the vehicle stocks turn over, at an average cost of only 12 bucks a barrel, instead of 26 for buying the oil. And then another six can be made robustly, competitively, from cellulosic ethanol and a little bio-diesel, without interfering at all with the water or land needs of crop production.
如果你愿意,你可以在模具里直接加颜色,就省的给车喷漆了 这两个是汽车制造中最麻烦也是最贵的部分。 因此最后你将会比汽车行业中最精小的工厂, 通用设在兰辛的分厂,还要节省2/5的资金 工厂规模也会更小。 现在,如果你查阅一份类似分析石油使用方式的报告的话, 这里面包括建筑,工业,原料等, 你会发现我们每天要消耗2800万桶, 这是政府预测的到2025年时的数据, 那么,通过提高使用效率,到时候我们每桶可节约8美元, 随着汽车股的逆转,还可以省掉另外7美元 平均下来每桶油只需12美元 而不是之前预言的26美元 接着,汽油中的一半可以用有强劲竞争力的 纤维素乙醇和少量的生物柴油来代替, 它们是用水和粮食造的,绝对没有问题。
There is a huge amount of gas to be saved, about half the projected gas at about an eighth of its price. And here are some no-brainer substitutions of it, with lots left over. So much, in fact, that after you've handled the domestic oil forecast from areas already approved, you have only this little bit left, and let's see how we can meet that, because there's a pretty flexible menu of ways. We could, of course, buy more efficiency. Maybe you ought to buy efficiency at 26 bucks instead of 12. Or wait to capture the second half of it. Or we could, of course, just get this little bit by continuing to import some Canadian and Mexican oil, or the ethanol the Brazilians would love to sell us. But they'll sell it to Japan and China instead, because we have tariff barriers to protect our corn farmers, and they don't.
这样能省下大量的汽油 计划中大约一半的石油价格只有其原价格的1/8 还有其他一些简单易行的代替方法,给我们很多选择余地。 说了这么多,事实上,你已经在公认的领域把握住了 国内石油的走势 只剩下这点,先看看我们应该怎样解决 因为方法灵活多变,选择性大。 我们当然可以,少花钱买到更多的燃料 也许你花12美元买的燃料原本值26美元 或者原本只能买到这些量的一半 当然我们还可以,通过不断从 加拿大和墨西哥进口来获得一点油头 或者喜欢酒精的巴西人会愿意卖给我们 但他们还可以选择卖给日本和中国 因为我们设有贸易壁垒来保护玉米农场主,而他们没有。
Or we could use the saved gas directly to cover all of this balance, or if we used it as hydrogen, which is more profitable and efficient, we'd get rid of the domestic oil too. And that doesn't even count, for example, that available land in the Dakotas can cost effectively make enough wind power to run every highway vehicle in the country. So we have lots of options. And the choice of menu and timing is quite flexible. Now, to make this happen quicker and with higher confidence, there is a few ways government could help. For example, fee-bates, a combination of a fee and a rebate in any size class of vehicle you want, can increase the price of inefficient vehicles and correspondingly pay you a rebate for efficient vehicles. You're not paid to change size class. You are paid to pick efficiency within a size class, in a way equivalent to looking at all fourteen years of life-cycle fuel savings rather than just the first two or three.
或者动用石油储备来达到供求平衡 要是我们用氢气做替代品,效率和效益就更高了 也就不用再为国内石油发愁了 类似的方法不计其数,举个例子, 如果能有效开发达科他州可利用的空地, 风能可供所有高速路上的车运行使用。 所以说我们有很多选择 方法和时机也都非常灵活 那么,为了能尽快着手,增强信心 政府可以在某些方面帮帮忙 比如,针对市场上的所有车型 设计一个收费和回扣方案 以提高低效汽车的价格 并相应地,给那些买高效车的人打折 你不必为换车型而花钱 同一车型,只需在选择使用效率时付账, 在某种程度上,相当于考虑节省整整14年生命周期的燃料 而不只是两三年的
This expands choice rapidly in the market, and actually makes more money for automakers as well. I'd like to deal with the lack of affordable personal mobility in this country by making it very cheaply possible for low-income families to get efficient, reliable, warranted new cars that they could otherwise never get. And for each car so financed, scrap almost one clunker, preferably the dirtiest ones. This creates a new million-car-a-year market for Detroit from customers they weren't going to get otherwise, because they weren't creditworthy and could never afford a new car. And Detroit will make money on every unit. It turns out that if, say, African-American and white households had the same car ownership, it would cut employment disparity about in half by providing better access to job opportunities. So this is a huge social win, too.
市场上迅速多了这么多选择 实际也让汽车制造商多了很多赚钱的机会 下面我想说的是,美国缺少普通人能用得起的交通工具 应该生产出适合低收入家庭的,价位最低 耗油少,又有可靠保证的新车 否则,他们永远都买不起车。 由于购买汽车费用很高,报废的汽车基本上破旧不堪 往往也是最脏的 这每年能带给底特律百万辆车的市场 而这批客户却是他们主动放弃的 因为他们没有良好的信誉,也根本买不起新车 底特律会在每一个环节上创造财富 事实证明,如果说,美国黑人和白人家庭 有着相同的汽车购买力 就业差异会减少一半 因为就业机会增多,就业渠道扩大 所以说这是全社会的一个极大胜利。
Governments buy hundreds of thousands of cars a year. There are smart ways to buy them and to aggregate that purchasing power to bring very efficient vehicles into the market faster. And we could even do an X Prize-style golden carrot that's worth stretching further for. For example, a billion-dollar prize for the first U.S. automaker to sell 200,000 really advanced vehicles, like some you saw earlier. Then the legacy airlines can't afford to buy the efficient new planes they desperately need to cut their fuel bills, but if you felt philosophically you wanted to do anything about that, there are ways to finance it.
政府每年要买几十万辆车 购买新型车是一个明智之举,不仅能提高购买力 还能促进高效节能车在市场上的推广 我们甚至可以制一个汽车X大奖式的黄金卡洛计划 这个计划值得我们进一步完善 比如,谁先卖掉20万辆真正先进的汽车, 就奖励1亿美元,就像你们先前看到的那样。 传统航空公司买不起新型的高效飞机 他们迫切需要降低燃料费用 但是如果你头脑冷静,想要解决这一问题 现在就有两个办法
And at the same time to scrap inefficient old planes, so that if they were otherwise to come back in the air, they would waste more oil, and block the uptake of efficient, new planes. Those part inefficient planes are worth more to society dead than alive. We ought to take them out back and shoot them, and put bounty hunters after them. Then there's an important military role. That in creating the move to high-volume, low-cost commercial production of these kinds of materials, or for that matter, ultra-light steels that are a good backup technology, the military can do the trick it did in turning DARPAnet into the Internet. Just turn it over to the private sector, and we have an Internet.
并且与此同时处理掉那些低效的旧飞机 因此一旦他们重新飞上天空 就会浪费更多的油 还会阻碍新型高效飞机的推广使用 这部分低效飞机 报废了反倒对社会更有好处 我们应该把它们拖出去枪毙, 还要让它们永不翻身 军队在接下来的方面起到重要作用 在推动这种大容量 低成本材料的商业化生产过程中 或着,在超轻型钢 这一优质备份技术上, 军队可以起到很大作用, 就像它曾把国防高级研究计划局网变成互联网一样 只是让私营机构经营,互联网就诞生了
The same for GPS. The same for the modern semi-conductor industry. That is, military science and technology that they need can create the advanced materials-industrial cluster that transforms its civilian economy and gets the country off oil, which would be a huge contribution to eliminating conflict over oil and advancing national and global security. Then we need to retool the car industry and do retraining, and shift the convergence of the energy and ag-value chains to shift faster from hydrocarbons to carbohydrates, and get out of our own way in other ways. And make the transition to more efficient vehicles go faster.
GPS也是这样来的 现代半导体工业也是这样来的。 也就是说,军队所需的军事科学和技术, 可以催生出先进的材料产业群, 转变为民用经济,使国家摆脱石油的制约 有益于解除石油冲突 还可以推动国家和全球安全。 接下来,我们需要重新整备汽车产业,提高技能,进行再培训, 做好能源替换和股份价值转移的衔接工作 尽快把燃料从碳氢化合物转变为碳水化合物 并且在其他方面也走出我们自己的路子 更快地过渡到高效汽车的时代
But here's how the whole thing fits together. Instead of official forecasts of oil use and oil imports going forever up, they can turn down with the 12 dollars a barrel efficiency, down steeply by adding the supply-side substitutions at 18 bucks, all implemented at slower rates than we've done before when we paid attention. And if we start adding tranches of hydrogen in there, we are rapidly off imports and completely off oil in the 2040s.
但这里是整个过程是如何贯穿在一起的。 官方预测石油使用量 和进口量会无止境地增长,与官方不同的是, 他们可以把价格降到每桶12美元, 如果在18美元的时候替换供应燃料,可以迅速降低对石油的需求, 注意一下你会发现,在我们着手之前,一切已经在缓慢进展着了 如果现在开始在那里添加部分氢气 很快我们就不用进口,到2040年就可以不再使用石油
And the one thing I'd like to point out here is that we've done this before. In this eight-year period, 1977 to 85, when we last paid attention, the economy grew 27 percent, oil use fell 17 percent, oil imports fell 50 percent, oil imports from the Persian Gulf fell 87 percent. They would have been gone if we'd kept that up one more year. Well, that was with very old technologies and delivery methods.
而有件事我想在此指出的是,这一点我们曾经做到过。 我们上次注意到,1977年到1985这8年期间, 经济增长了27%,石油使用量却下降了17% 石油进口量下降了50%,波斯湾的石油进口量更是下降了87% 如果我们再坚持一年,我们就不再依靠波斯湾进口石油了。 对啦,当时我们的技术和信息工具还都很陈旧
We could rerun that play a lot better now. And yet what we proved then is the U.S. has more market power than OPEC. Ours is on the demand side. We are the Saudi Arabia of "nega-barrels." (Laughter) We can use less oil faster than they can conveniently sell less oil.
如果现在再来一次,肯定比当初更好。 我们证明了,美国比欧派克拥有更强的市场力量。 我们是需求方。 我们才是沙特阿拉伯的“金主”。 在他们拿石油牵制我们之前,我们可以减少对石油的需求
(Applause)
(掌声)
Whatever your reason for wanting to do this, whether you're concerned about national security or price volatility -- (Laughter) -- or jobs, or the planet, or your grand-kids, it seems to me that this is an oil endgame that we should all be playing to win. Please download your copy, and thank you very much.
不论你这样做的动机是什么, 是担心国家安全还是害怕价格上涨 (笑~~) 是工作,还是地球,还是你的子孙后代 在我看来,这是石油的最后博弈 我们都应为了胜利参与进来 欢迎下载,非常感谢各位。
(Applause)
(掌声)¾