So when I was a kid ... this was my team.
Dakle, kada sam bio dijete... ovo je bio moj tim.
(Laughter)
(Smijeh)
I stunk at sports. I didn't like to play them, I didn't like to watch them. So this is what I did. I went fishing. And for all of my growing up I fished on the shores of Connecticut, and these are the creatures that I saw on a regular basis. But after I grew up and went to college, and I came home in the early 90's, this is what I found. My team had shrunk. It was like literally having your roster devastated. And as I sort of looked into that, from a very personal point of view as a fisherman, I started to kind of figure out, well, what was the rest of the world thinking about it?
Bio sam loš u sportovima. Nisam ih volio igrati, niti sam ih volio gledati. Ovo je ono što sam ja radio. Išao sam pecati. Cijelo svoje djetinjstvo pecao sam na obalama Connecticuta, I ovo su bića koja sam svakodnevno gledao. Ali nakon što sam odrastao i otišao na fakultet, i došao kući u ranim devedesetima, pronašao sam ovo. Moj tim se smanjio. To je doslovno bilo kao da se vaš tim uništio. A ja sam nekako na to gledao, sa vrlo osobnog stajališta, kao ribar. Onda sam se počeo pitati, što ostatak svijeta misli o tome?
First place I started to look was fish markets. And when I went to fish markets, in spite of where I was -- whether I was in North Carolina, or Paris, or London, or wherever -- I kept seeing this weirdly repeating trope of four creatures, again and again -- on the menus, on ice -- shrimp, tuna, salmon and cod. And I thought this was pretty strange, and as I looked at it, I was wondering, did anyone else notice this sort of shrinking of the market?
Prvo gdje sam tražio odgovor bile su ribarnice. Kada sam otišao u ribarnice, neovisno gdje sam bio -- bila to Sjeverna Karolina, ili Pariz, ili London, bilo gdje -- Neprestano sam viđao četiri vrste čudnih bića, opet i opet -- na jelovnicima, na ledu -- škamp, tuna, losos i bakalar. Pomislio sam kako je ovo čudno, i dok sam gledao, pitao sam se, da li je još netko primjetio ovoliko smanjenje ponude ?
Well, when I looked into it, I realized that people didn't look at it as their team. Ordinary people, the way they looked at seafood was like this. It's not an unusual human characteristic to reduce the natural world down to very few elements. We did it before, 10,000 years ago, when we came out of our caves. If you look at fire pits from 10,000 years ago, you'll see raccoons, you'll see, you know, wolves, you'll see all kinds of different creatures. But if you telescope to the age of -- you know, 2,000 years ago, you'll see these four mammals: pigs, cows, sheep and goats. It's true of birds, too. You look at the menus in New York City restaurants 150 years ago, 200 years ago, you'll see snipe, woodcock, grouse, dozens of ducks, dozens of geese. But telescope ahead to the age of modern animal husbandry, and you'll see four: turkeys, ducks, chicken and geese.
No, kada sam bolje pogledao, Shvatio sam da ljudi nisu gledali na njih kao na svoj tim. Način na koji su obični ljudi gledali na morsku ribu bio je ovakav. Nije neobična ljudska karakteristika da smanji prirodu na nekoliko elemenata. Učinili smo to prije 10,000 godina, kada smo izašli iz svojih špilja. Ako pogledate ognjišta prije 10,000 godina, vidjeti ćete rakune, vidjeti ćete, znate, vukove, vidjeti ćete puno različitih bića. Ali ako se prebacimo u razdoblje prije 2,000 godina vidjeti ćete ova četiri sisavca: svinje, krave, ovce i koze. Isto je i za ptice. I pogledamo u jelovnike u restoranima u New Yorku Prije 150, 200 godina, vidjeti ćete šljuke, divlje kokoške, desetke patki, desetke gusaka. Prebacimo li se u razdoblje modernog stočarstva, vidjeti ćete ove četiri vrste: Purice, patke, kokoši i guske.
So it makes sense that we've headed in this direction. But how have we headed in this direction? Well ... first it's a very, very new problem. This is the way we've been fishing the oceans over the last 50 years. World War II was a tremendous incentive to arm ourselves in a war against fish. All of the technology that we perfected during World War II -- sonar, lightweight polymers -- all these things were redirected towards fish. And so you see this tremendous buildup in fishing capacity, quadrupling in the course of time, from the end of World War II to the present time. And right now that means we're taking between 80 and 90 million metric tons out of the sea every year. That's the equivalent of the human weight of China taken out of the sea every year. And it's no coincidence that I use China as the example because China is now the largest fishing nation in the world.
Tako da ima smisla Što smo krenuli u ovom smjeru. Ali kako smo uopće krenuli u tom smjeru? Pa... prije svega, to je novi problem. To je način na koji smo lovili po oceanima zadnjih 50 godina. Drugi svjetski rat je bio veliki poticaj da se naoružamo u ratu protiv riba. Sva tehnologija koju smo usavršili tijekom Drugog svijetskog rata sonari, lagani polimeri -- sve te stvari su bile usmjerene prema ribama. Tako da vidite ovo veliko pojačavanje kapaciteta ribolova, koje se četiri puta više povećalo od Drugog svjetskog rata do danas. Trenutno to znači da uzimamo između 80 u 90 milijuna metričkih tona ribe iz mora svake godine. To je jednako ljudskoj težini Kine uzetoj iz mora svake godine. Nije slučajnost da koristim Kinu kao primjer Zato što je Kina prva zemlja u svijetu što se tiče ribolova.
Well, that's only half the story. The other half of the story is this incredible boom in fish farming and aquaculture, which is now, only in the last year or two, starting to exceed the amount of wild fish that we produce. So that if you add wild fish and farmed fish together, you get the equivalent of two Chinas created from the ocean each and every year. And again, it's not a coincidence that I use China as the example, because China, in addition to being the biggest catcher of fish, is also the biggest farmer of fish.
No, to je tek pola priče. Druga polovica priče je izvanredan uspon u ribljem uzgoju i akvakulturi. što je danas, samo u zadnje godinu, dvije, Počelo povećavati količinu divlje ribe koju proizvodimo. Pa tako ako dodate divlju i uzgojenu ribu, dobijete ekvivalent od dvije Kine stvorene iz oceana svake godine. Ponavljam, nije slučajnost da koristim Kinu kao primjer, zato što Kina, osim što je broj jedan u ribolovu, također je najveći uzgajivač ribe.
So let's look though at the four choices we are making right now. The first one -- by far the most consumed seafood in America and in much of the West, is shrimp. Shrimp in the wild -- as a wild product -- is a terrible product. 5, 10, 15 pounds of wild fish are regularly killed to bring one pound of shrimp to the market. They're also incredibly fuel inefficient to bring to the market. In a recent study that was produced out of Dalhousie University, it was found that dragging for shrimp is one of the most carbon-intensive ways of fishing that you can find.
Pogledajmo sada četiri izbora riba. Prva, najviše konzumirana morska riba u Americi i na zapadu je škamp. Škamp u divljini Kao proizvod divljine je užasan proizvod. 2, 4, 6 kilograma divlje ribe se redovito ubija da bi se dobio jedan kilogram škampa na tržištu. Također su iznimno energetski neučinkoviti za prijenos na tržište. U zadnjem istraživanju koje je provelo Dalhousie University, ustanovljeno je da je lov na škampe jedan od najvećih visoko ugljičnih načina koje se može loviti.
So you can farm them, and people do farm them, and they farm them a lot in this very area. Problem is ... the place where you farm shrimp is in these wild habitats -- in mangrove forests. Now look at those lovely roots coming down. Those are the things that hold soil together, protect coasts, create habitats for all sorts of young fish, young shrimp, all sorts of things that are important to this environment. Well, this is what happens to a lot of coastal mangrove forests. We've lost millions of acres of coastal mangroves over the last 30 or 40 years. That rate of destruction has slowed, but we're still in a major mangrove deficit.
Tako da ih možete uzgajati, ljudi ih zaista uzgajaju, i uzgajaju ih najviše na tom području. Problem je... taj što su mjesta na kojima se uzgajaju u divljem staništu, Uumangrovim šumama. Pogledajte divno korijenje koje se spušta. Zadržavaju zemlju, štiti obale, stvara staništa za sve vrste mladih riba, mladih škampa, i sve ostale važne stvari koje su bitne za okoliš. Dakle, ovo se događa u većini obalnih mangrovnih šuma. Izgubili smo milijune hektara obalnih mangrova u zadnjih 30 do 40 godina. Ta stopa uništenja se usporila, ali smo i dalje u velikom deficitu mangrovnih šuma.
The other thing that's going on here is a phenomenon that the filmmaker Mark Benjamin called "Grinding Nemo." This phenomenon is very, very relevant to anything that you've ever seen on a tropical reef. Because what's going on right now, we have shrimp draggers dragging for shrimp, catching a huge amount of bycatch, that bycatch in turn gets ground up and turned into shrimp food. And sometimes, many of these vessels -- manned by slaves -- are catching these so-called "trash fish," fish that we would love to see on a reef, grinding them up and turning them into shrimp feed -- an ecosystem literally eating itself and spitting out shrimp.
Još jedna stvar koja se ovdje događa Je fenomen redatelja Marka Benjamina zvan ''mljevenje Nema''. Ovaj fenomen je jako, jako relevantan za sve što ste ikada vidjeli na tropskom grebenu. Jer ono što se sada događa je to da imamo lovce na škampe, koji love velike količine neželjenih riba Koje budu prerađene u hranu za škampe. I često ove brodice -- kojima upravljaju robovi -- love ribu koja je ''smeće'', ribu koju bismo htjeli vidjeti na grebenima, melju ih i pretvaraju u hranu za škampe -- ekosustav koji jede sam sebe i ispljune škampe.
The next most consumed seafood in America, and also throughout the West, is tuna. So tuna is this ultimate global fish. These huge management areas have to be observed in order for tuna to be well managed. Our own management area, called a Regional Fisheries Management Organization, is called ICCAT, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas. The great naturalist Carl Safina once called it, "The International Conspiracy to Catch all the Tunas." Of course we've seen incredible improvement in ICCAT in the last few years, there is total room for improvement, but it remains to be said that tuna is a global fish, and to manage it, we have to manage the globe.
Sljedeća najviše konzumirana riba u Americi, i također na zapadu, je tuna. Tuna je univerzalna riba. Velika područja moraju biti čuvana kako bi se tuna dobro kontrolirala. Naše kontrolno područje zove se Regionalna upravna organizacija ribarnica, tj. ICCAT - Međunarodna komisija za očuvanje atlantskih tuna. Veliki prirodnjak Carl Safina je to jednom nazvao ''Internacionalna Urota za Lov svih Tuna''. Naravno, vidjeli smo veliki napredak u ICCAT-u zadnjih par godina, ima puno mjesta za napredak, ali i dalje tvrde da je tuna globalna riba, i da bismo to promjenili moramo promjeniti svijet.
Well, we could also try to grow tuna but tuna is a spectacularly bad animal for aquaculture. Many people don't know this but tuna are warm-blooded. They can heat their bodies 20 degrees above ambient temperature, they can swim at over 40 miles an hour. So that pretty much eliminates all the advantages of farming a fish, right? A farmed fish is -- or a fish is cold-blooded, it doesn't move too much. That's a great thing for growing protein. But if you've got this crazy, wild creature that swims at 40 miles an hour and heats its blood -- not a great candidate for aquaculture.
Možemo pokušati i uzgajati tunu, ali tuna je spektakularno loša životinja za akvakulturu. Većina ljudi ne zna da je tuna toplokrvna. Mogu se zagrijati i do 20 stupnjeva iznad temperature zraka, mogu plivati i preko 40 km/h. To poprilično eliminira sve prednosti uzgoja , zar ne? A uzgojna riba je -- hladnkokrvna i ne kreće se previše. To je sjajna stvar za uzgoj proteina. Ali ako imate ovo ludo, divlje biće koje pliva 40 hm/h i zagrijava svoju krv -- nije baš idealan kandidat za akvakulturu.
The next creature -- most consumed seafood in America and throughout the West -- is salmon. Now salmon got its plundering, too, but it didn't really necessarily happen through fishing. This is my home state of Connecticut. Connecticut used to be home to a lot of wild salmon. But if you look at this map of Connecticut, every dot on that map is a dam. There are over 3,000 dams in the state of Connecticut. I often say this is why people in Connecticut are so uptight --
Sljedeće biće -- koje naviše konzumira Amerika i zapad -- Je losos. Naravno i losos je bio ''pljačkan'' što se nije nužno događalo kroz ribolov. Ovo je moja država Connecticut. Connecticut je nekada bio dom divljeg lososa. No, ako pogledate ovu mapu Connecticuta, svaka točka na mapi je nasip. Postoji više od 3,000 nasipa u Connecticutu. Zato ja znam reći da su ljudi u Connecticutu napeti --
(Laughter)
(Smijeh)
If somebody could just unblock Connecticut's chi, I feel that we could have an infinitely better world. But I made this particular comment at a convention once of national parks officers, and this guy from North Carolina sidled up to me, he says, "You know, you oughtn't be so hard on your Connecticut, cause we here in North Carolina, we got 35,000 dams." So it's a national epidemic, it's an international epidemic. And there are dams everywhere, and these are precisely the things that stop wild salmon from reaching their spawning grounds.
Kada bi bar netko mogao odblokirati chi Connecticuta, mislim da bi tada svijet mogao biti bolji. Ali ovo sam komentirao i na okupljanju čuvara nacionalnih parkova gdje je jedan član iz Sjeverne Karoline došao i rekao: ''Znaš, ne smiješ tako govoriti o svom Connecticutu zato što mi ovdje u Sjevernoj Karolini imamo 35,000 nasipa.'' Tako da ovo nije državna već internacionalna epidemija. Nasipi su posvuda, i baš oni će spriječiti divljeg lososa da ne dosegne mjesto gdje može izleći jaja.
So as a result, we've turned to aquaculture, and salmon is one the most successful, at least from a numbers point of view. When they first started farming salmon, it could take as many as six pounds of wild fish to make a single pound of salmon. The industry has, to its credit, greatly improved. They've gotten it below two to one, although it's a little bit of a cheat because if you look at the way aquaculture feed is produced, they're measuring pellets -- pounds of pellets per pound of salmon. Those pellets are in turn reduced fish. So the actual -- what's called the FIFO, the fish in and the fish out -- kind of hard to say. But in any case, credit to the industry, it has lowered the amount of fish per pound of salmon.
Kao rezultat toga okrenuli smo se akvakulturi, što čini uzgoj lososa najuspješnijim, s brojnih gledališta. Kada smo počeli uzgajati lososa trebalo nam je oko tri kilograma divlje ribe da napravimo pola kilograma lososa. Industrija se, priznajmo im to, vrlo poboljšala. Smanjili su odnos na kilogram za pola, iako je to pomalo i prijevara jer, ako pogledamo način na koji se proizvode, vidimo da mjere palete na način: kilogram peleta po kilogramu lososa. Ti peleti smanjuju kvalitetu ribe. Koja riba ide unutra a koja van? Teško je reći. Ali u svakom slučaju, pohvale idu industriji što je smanjila količinu ribe po kilogramu lososa.
Problem is we've also gone crazy with the amount of salmon that we're producing. Aquaculture is the fastest growing food system on the planet. It's growing at something like seven percent per year. And so even though we're doing less per fish to bring it to the market, we're still killing a lot of these little fish.
Problem je i u tome što smo pretjerali i u količini lososa kojeg proizvodimo. Akvakultura je najbrže rastući prehrambeni sustav na planetu. Raste otprilike oko 7% godišnje. Unatoč tome što koristimo manje riba koje stavljamo na tržište, i dalje ubijamo veliku količinu tih malih riba.
And it's not just fish that we're feeding fish to, we're also feeding fish to chickens and pigs. So we've got chickens and they're eating fish, but weirdly, we also have fish that are eating chickens. Because the byproducts of chickens -- feathers, blood, bone -- get ground up and fed to fish. So I often wonder, is there a fish that ate a chicken that ate a fish? It's sort of a reworking of the chicken and egg thing. Anyway --
Ne radi se samo o ribama kojima hranimo druge ribe, također ribama hranimo i kokoši i svinje. Tako da imamo kokoši koje jedu ribe, i začuđujuće, ribe koje jedu kokoši. Zato što se dijelovi kokoške, kao što su perje, krv i kosti, samelju i time nahrane ribe. Često se pitam, postoji li negdje riba koja je pojela kokoš koja je pojela ribu? Podsjeća na pitanje o kokoši i jajetu?
(Laughter)
(Smijeh)
All together, though, it results in a terrible mess. What you're talking about is something between 20 and 30 million metric tons of wild creatures that are taken from the ocean and used and ground up. That's the equivalent of a third of a China, or of an entire United States of humans that's taken out of the sea each and every year.
Sve zajedno rezultira velikim neredom. Ono o čemu pričamo jest to da je između 20 i 30 milijuna tona divljih bića izvađeno iz oceana i iskorišteno. To je jednako jednoj trećini Kine, ili cijelim Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama izvađenima iz mora iz godine u godinu.
The last of the four is a kind of amorphous thing. It's what the industry calls "whitefish." There are many fish that get cycled into this whitefish thing but the way to kind of tell the story, I think, is through that classic piece of American culinary innovation, the Filet-O-Fish sandwich. So the Filet-O-Fish sandwich actually started as halibut. And it started because a local franchise owner found that when he served his McDonald's on Friday, nobody came. Because it was a Catholic community, they needed fish. So he went to Ray Kroc and he said, "I'm going to bring you a fish sandwich, going to be made out of halibut." Ray Kroc said, "I don't think it's going to work. I want to do a Hula Burger, and there's going to be a slice of pineapple on a bun. But let's do this, let's have a bet. Whosever sandwich sells more, that will be the winning sandwich." Well, it's kind of sad for the ocean that the Hula Burger didn't win. So he made his halibut sandwich. Unfortunately though, the sandwich came in at 30 cents. Ray wanted the sandwich to come in at 25 cents, so he turned to Atlantic cod. We all know what happened to Atlantic cod in New England.
Zadnja od četiri je bezoblična riba. Ono što u industriji zovu ''bijela riba''. Postoji mnogo stvari koje se stavljaju u ovu bijelu ribu, a najbolji način za ispričati priču je, mislim, kroz klasičnu priču Američke kulinarske inovacije, ribljeg sendviča. Riblji je sendvič zapravo nastao uporabom iveraka. Počeo je zato što je lokalni vlasnik McDonaldsa zaključio da kada je posluživao svoj jelovnik petkom, nitko nije došao. Bio je u katoličkoj sredini gdje su jeli ribu petkom. Otišao je do Ray Kroca i rekao, ''Napraviti ću ti riblji sendvič koji ću napraviti od iveraka.'' Ray Krock je rekao '' Ne vjerujem da ćeš uspjeti. Želim napraviti Hula burger koji će imati komad ananasa na vrhu. Ali može, hajde da se kladimo. Čiji se sendvič bude bolje prodavao, to će biti pobjednički sendvič.'' Na veliku žalost oceana, Hula burger nije pobijedio, Uspio je napraviti svoj riblji sendvič. Nažalost, sendvič je koštao 30 centi, a Ray je htio da košta 25 centi, Pa se okrenio atlantskom bakalaru. A svi znamo što se dogodilo bakalaru u Novoj Engleskoj.
So now the Filet-O-Fish sandwich is made out of Alaska pollock, it's the largest fin fish fishery in the United States, 2 to 3 billion pounds of fish taken out of the sea every single year. If we go through the pollock, the next choice is probably going to be tilapia. Tilapia is one of those fish nobody ever heard of 20 years ago. It's actually a very efficient converter of plant protein into animal protein, and it's been a godsend to the third world. It's actually a tremendously sustainable solution, it goes from an egg to an adult in nine months. The problem is that when you look about the West, it doesn't do what the West wants it to do. It really doesn't have what's called an oily fish profile. It doesn't have the EPA and DHA omega-3s that we all think are going to make us live forever.
Tako da je danas riblji sendvič napravljen od aljaške kolje, koja je najbolja uzgojna riba u SAD-u, 2 do 3 milijardi kilograma te ribe vadi se iz more svake godine. Ako nestane kolje, sljedeći izbor će vjerojatno biti tilapija. Tilapija je riba za koju nitko nije čuo do prije 20 godina. Ona je jako učinkovita u pretvorbi biljnih proteina u životinjske, bila je spas za treći svijet. To je zapravo održivo riješenje, treba devet mjeseci razvitka do odraslog oblika. Problem je što, kada pogledamo zapad, to nije ono što zapad želi. Nema ono nešto što se zove uljni riblji profil. Nema EPA i DHA omega-3 kiselina za koje mislimo da će nam podariti vječni život.
So what do we do? I mean, first of all, what about this poor fish, the clupeids? The fish that represent a huge part of that 20 to 30 million metric tons. Well, one possibility that a lot of conservationists have raised is could we eat them? Could we eat them directly instead of feeding them to salmon? There are arguments for it. They are tremendously fuel efficient to bring to market, a fraction of the fuel cost of say, shrimp, and at the very top of the carbon efficiency scale. They also are omega-3 rich, a great source for EPA and DHA. So that is a potential. And if we were to go down that route what I would say is, instead of paying a few bucks a pound -- or a few bucks a ton, really -- and making it into aquafeed, could we halve the catch and double the price for the fishermen and make that our way of treating these particular fish?
Što moramo napraviti? Mislim, kao prvo, šta ćemo s ovom jadnom ribom, srdeljkom ? To je riba koja čini veliki dio od tih 20,30 milijuna tona. Pojavilo se pitanje možemo li ih jesti? Možemo li ih jesti direktno, da njima ne hranimo prvo losose? Ovo su argumenti. Zahtjevaju puno energetske vrijednosti da bi se stavile na tržište, dio te vrijednosti košta, kao jedan škamp, i na samom je vrhu što se tiče efikasnosti ugljikohidrata. Također su bogate omega-3 kiselinama, odličan izvor EPA i DHA. To je potencijal. No ako ćemo već ići u tom smjeru, umjesto da plaćamo nekoliko dolara za kilogram, ili tonu, i hranimo njima ribe, možemo li prepoloviti ulov i udvostručiti cijenu za ribolovce I tako odlučivati o sudbini tih riba?
Other possibility though, which is much more interesting, is looking at bivalves, particularly mussels. Now, mussels are very high in EPA and DHA, they're similar to canned tuna. They're also extremely fuel efficient. To bring a pound of mussels to market is about a thirtieth of the carbon as required to bring beef to market. They require no forage fish, they actually get their omega-3s by filtering the water of microalgae. In fact, that's where omega-3s come from, they don't come from fish. Microalgae make the omega-3s, they're only bioconcentrated in fish.
Druga mogućnost,koja je puno zanimljivija, je da obratimo pažnju na školjkaše, posebno dagnje. Dagnje sadrže veliku koncentraciju EPA i DHA, slične su konzerviranoj tuni. Imaju veliku energetsku vrijednost. Stavljanje dagnji na tržište čini jednu trećinu ugljikohidrata što je isto kao i kod govedine. Ne zahtjevaju dohranu ribama Dobiju svoje omega 3 kiseline filtracijom mikroalgi u vodi. Ustvari, tako i dobivamo omega 3 kiseline, ne iz ribe. Mikroalge proizvode omega 3 kiseline koje se koncentriraju u ribama.
Mussels and other bivalves do tremendous amounts of water filtration. A single mussel can filter dozens of gallons every single day. And this is incredibly important when we look at the world. Right now, nitrification, overuse of phosphates in our waterways are causing tremendous algal blooms. Over 400 new dead zones have been created in the last 20 years, tremendous sources of marine life death.
Dagnje i ostali školjkaši naveliko filtriraju vodu. Jedna dagnja može filtrirati na destke galona vode svakog dana. To je jako bitno kada pogledamo svijet. Trenutno, nitrati i prevelika uporaba fosfata iz vode uzrokuju preveliko cvjetanje algi. Više od 400 mrtvih zona stvoreno je u zadnjih 20 godina, veliki uzrok umiranja riba.
We also could look at not a fish at all. We could look at a vegetable. We could look at seaweed, the kelps, all these different varieties of things that can be high in omega-3s, can be high in proteins, tremendously good things. They filter the water just like mussels do. And weirdly enough, it turns out that you can actually feed this to cows. Now, I'm not a big fan of cattle. But if you wanted to keep growing cattle in a time and place where water resources are limited, you're growing seaweed in the water, you don't have to water it -- major consideration.
Također uopće ne moramo ni gledati na ribu. Možemo pogledati i povrće. Možemo pogledati morsku travu, i sve ostale stvari koje mogu biti pune omega 3 kiselina, pune proteina, i ostalih odličnih stvari. Filtriraju vodu poput dagnji. Začuđujuće, izgleda da ovime možete hraniti i krave. Ja nisam veliki fan stoke, Ali ako želite uzgajati stoku u vremenu i mjestu gdje su izvori vode ograničeni, možete uzgajati morsku travu u vodi, čak je ne morate zaljevati, razmislite.
And the last fish is a question mark. We have the ability to create aquacultured fish that creates a net gain of marine protein for us. This creature would have to be vegetarian, it would have to be fast growing, it would have to be adaptable to a changing climate and it would have to have that oily fish profile, that EPA, DHA, omega-3 fatty acid profile that we're looking for.
Zadnja riba je pod velikim upitnikom. Imamo mogućnost stvoriti uzgojnu ribu, koja stvara neto dobit morskog proteina za nas. Ovo biće moralo bi biti vegeterijanac, moralo bi brzo rasti, moralo bi se prilagoditi na promjenjivu klimu i moralo bi imati taj uljni riblji profil, EPA, DHA, omega 3 kiseline koje tražimo.
This exists kind of on paper. I have been reporting on these subjects for 15 years. Every time I do a new story, somebody tells me, "We can do all that. We can do it. We've figured it all out. We can produce a fish that's a net gain of marine protein and has omega-3s." Great. It doesn't seem to be getting scaled up. It is time to scale this up. If we do, 30 million metric tons of seafood, a third of the world catch, stays in the water.
To postoji samo na papiru. Izvještavam o ovim temama već 15 godina. Svaki put kada napravim novu priču netko mi kaže '' Možemo mi sve to napraviti. Sve smo shvatili. '' Možemo mi sve to napraviti. Sve smo shvatili. Koja ima neto dobit morskog proteina I omega 3 kiselina.'' Divno. Ne uspjevamo to dobiti. Vrijeme je, Jer ako uspijemo, 30 milijuna tona morske ribe , trećina svijetskog ulova, će ostati pod vodom.
So I guess what I'm saying is this is what we've been going with. We tend to go with our appetites rather than our minds. But if we went with this, or some configuration of it, we might have a little more of this.
Ono što pokušavam reći jest da je ovo način na koji se nosimo sa tim. Uvijek naginjemo prema svom apetitu prije nego pameti. Ali ako se potrudimo, imati ćemo puno više.
Thank you.
Hvala.
(Applause)
(Pljesak)