As the climate crisis worsens, too many people are swinging from denial straight to despair. But we should not lose hope. Humanity has enormous resources under its command, and by applying them wisely, we can still prevent ecological cataclysm.
随着气候危机的加剧, 很多人的态度正在从否认滑向绝望, 但我们不该失去希望。 人类手上有很多可供支配的资源, 如果资源使用得当, 我们仍可以阻止这一场生态灾难。
Let's talk numbers. What would it cost to prevent catastrophic climate change? Would we have to commit 50 percent of our total budget? Thirty percent? Ten percent? Naturally enough, no one knows for sure. My team and I have spent weeks poring over various reports and academic papers living in a cloud of numbers. But while the models behind the numbers are dizzyingly complex, the bottom line should cheer us up. Most experts converge on the number two percent.
让我们来看数据。 阻止灾难性的气候变化 需要多少钱呢? 我们需要付出总预算的 50%? 或者 30%? 亦或 10%? 当然,没人知道确定的答案。 我和我的团队花费了数周 仔细研究各种报告, 以及学术论文中的海量数据。 虽然这些数据背后的模型十分复杂, 但是预估最低值让人欣喜。 许多专家的结论指向 2%。
If humanity increases our annual investment in clean technologies and infrastructure by around two percent of global GDP, that should be enough to prevent catastrophic climate change.
如果人类将用于清洁技术和 基础设施的全年投资 提高至全球 GDP (国内生产总值)的大约 2%, 这就应该足以阻止 灾难性的气候变化问题。
If you want to see how experts got to that number, you're welcome to visit the Sapienship website.
假如你想知道专家们是 如何得到这个数字的, 欢迎访问 Sapienship 网站。
We can, of course, argue endlessly about the exact number, tweaking the models this way and that way. But we should look at the big picture. The crucial news is that the price tag of preventing the apocalypse is in the low single digits of annual global GDP. Even the more pessimistic models generally estimate it at below five percent. And most models say it requires investing only an additional two percent of global GDP in the right places.
当然,我们可以无休止地去争论 精确的数字, 对背后的模型进行 这样或那样的变形。 但我们应该着眼于宏观的方面。 重要的点是防止 这场灾难所需花费的代价 只是全球全年 GDP 的仅仅一小部分。 即使是那些更悲观的模型, 通常得到的预测 结果也在 5% 以下。 大多数模型的结果是 只需要在正确的地方 额外投资全球 GDP 的 2%。
And note the word investing. We are not talking about burning piles of banknotes in some huge sacrifice to the spirits of the Earth. We are talking about making investments in new technologies and infrastructure, such as advanced batteries or other technologies to store solar energy and updated power grids to distribute it. These investments will create lots of new jobs and economic opportunities and are likely to be economically profitable in the long run, in part by reducing health care expenditures and saving millions of people from sickness caused by air pollution. In addition, since oil and gas often prop up autocratic and militaristic regimes, reducing our dependence on fossil fuels will be a huge boon to democracy and to peace. All this can be translated into a concrete political plan of action.
请注意这里的用词——投资。 我们所谈论的不是为了地球之魂 做出巨大牺牲,大把烧钱。 我们讨论的是投资。 投资在新的技术和基础设施上, 比如更先进的电池或者其他 储存太阳能的技术, 升级电网和输电的技术。 这些投资可以创造大量 新的就业岗位以及经济发展机会。 长期来看, 我们更可能因此经济受益。 部分原因是气候问题的改善 可以减少医疗支出, 拯救因为空气污染 而患病的数百万人。 另外,由于石油和燃气经常助长 专制和军国主义政权, 减少我们对化石燃料的依赖 将对民主与和平大有助益。 这些都可以被转化为 切实可行的政治方案。
We have learned in recent years to define our goal in terms of one number: 1.5 degrees Celsius. We can define the means to do this with another number: two percent. Increased investment in clean technologies and infrastructure by two percentage points of global GDP, above 2020 levels. Of course, unlike the 1.5 Celsius figure, which is a scientifically robust threshold, the two-percent figure represents only a rough guesstimate. It should be understood as a ballpark figure that can help to frame the kind of political project humanity requires. It tells us that preventing catastrophic climate change is a totally feasible project, even though it would obviously cost a lot of money.
近些年我们用一个数字 来定义我们的目标 1.5 摄氏度。 为了实现这个目标, 我们所定义的方法 着眼于另一个数字:2%。 将用于清洁技术和 基础设置的投资 在 2020 年的投资额基础之上 增加全球 GDP 的 2%。 当然,不像 1.5 摄氏度 是一个科学意义上的 稳健阈值, 2% 这个数字代表的 只是一个粗略估计。 2% 应该被理解为一个 有助于构架人类所需的 政治方案的估计数据。 它所传递的信息是 阻止这场灾难性的气候变化 是切实可行的, 即使很显然需要为此投入很多钱。
Since global GDP in 2020 was about 85 trillion US dollars, we are talking about a number around 1.7 trillion US dollars. But that's still just two percent. This means that to save the environment, we don't need to completely derail the economy or to abandon the achievements of modern civilization. We just need to get our priorities right.
2020 年全球 GDP 大约为 85 万亿美金, 所以我们谈论的是 大约 1 万 7 千亿美金。 但它仍然只是 2%。 这意味着想要拯救环境, 我们不需要搅乱经济 或者抛弃现代文明的成就。 我们只需要明确优先次序。
Committing two percent of annual global GDP is far from the whole story, of course. It won't solve all our ecological problems, such as oceans brimming with plastic or the continued loss of biodiversity. And even to prevent catastrophic climate change we'll need to make sure that the funds are invested in the right places and that the new investments don't cause their own negative ecological or social fallout. We will also need to change some of our behaviors and ways of thinking from what we eat to how we travel.
当然,投入全球全年 GDP 的 2% 远远不是故事的全部。 它不能解决所有的生态问题, 比如海洋塑料问题或者 生物多样性持续丧失问题。 就算想要阻止灾难性的气候变化, 我们也得保证这笔钱 被投资到了正确的地方, 并且得保证这些 新的投资没有因其自身 而造成负面的生态或社会后果。 我们也需要改变 我们的一些行为习惯 和思考方式, 从我们的饮食到旅游出行。
None of that will be easy. But that's exactly why we have politicians. Their job is to deal with the hard stuff. And politicians are actually very skilled at shifting two percent of resources from here to there. It's what they do all the time. The difference between the policies of right wing and left wing parties often amounts to a few percentage points of GDP. When faced by a major crisis, politicians swiftly shift far more resources to fight it.
没有一项会是容易的。 但这也就是我们 有政治家的原因。 他们的工作就是去解决这些困难。 政治家们事实上也非常擅长 将 2% 的资源 从一个地方调整到另一个地方。 这是他们一直在做的事情。 右翼政党与左翼政党 政策上的不同 通常也会影响 GDP 的几个百分点。 当政治家们面对重大危机时, 他们可以迅速调动 远远更多的资源进行应对。
For example, in 1945, the US spent about 36 percent of its GDP on winning the Second World War. During the 2008-2009 financial crisis, the US government spent about 3.5 percent of GDP to save financial institutions that were deemed "too big to fail." Maybe humankind should also treat the Amazon rainforest as too big to fail.
例如,在 1945 年, 美国花费了其 GDP 的 36% 为了打赢二战。 在 2008-2009 年的金融危机中, 美国政府花费了 大约其GDP的 3.5% 来拯救那些被认为 “太大而不能倒”的金融机构。 或许人类也应该将亚马逊热带雨林 视为太大而不能倒。
Let's try a thought experiment. Given the current price of cleared rainforest land in South America and the size of the Amazon rainforest, buying the [whole] of it in order to protect local forests, biodiversity and human communities from destructive business interests would cost about 800 billion dollars, or a one-off payment of less than one percent of global GDP.
让我们来尝试一次思想实验, 已知南美洲被砍伐雨林的现价 和亚马逊热带雨林的面积, 为了保护当地森林和物种多样性, 使人类社区免受破坏性商业砍伐影响, 而把亚马逊热带雨林全部买下来, 大约要花费 8 千亿美金, 或者说是一次性支付 全球GDP的不到 1%。
In just the first nine months of 2020, governments around the world announced stimulus measures worth nearly 14 percent of global GDP to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic. If citizens pressed them hard enough, politicians can do the same to deal with the ecological crisis. So can investment banks and pension funds. Pension funds hold over 56 trillion US dollars. What's the point of having a pension if you don't have a future? At present,
仅是在 2020 年的前 9 个月, 全球政府为了应对新冠疫情而 宣布的刺激经济计划价值大约 全球 GDP 的 14%。 如果民众给政治家们施加足够压力, 政治家们也可以为了应对生态危机 做相同的事情。 投资银行和养老基金也可以这么做。 养老基金持有 超过 56 万亿美元。 如何人们连未来都没有的话, 那养老基金的意义是什么呢? 现在,
most businesses and governments are unwilling to make the additional two-percent investment necessary to prevent catastrophic climate change. Where does that money go instead? Well, every two years, approximately 2.4 percent of global GDP is spent on food that goes to waste. Governments also spend about 500 billion US dollars annually on -- wait for it -- direct subsidies for fossil fuels. That means that every 3.5 years governments write a nice fat check for an amount equivalent to two percent of annual global GDP and gift it to the fossil fuel industry. And it gets worse when you factor in the social and environmental costs that the fossil fuel industry causes but isn't asked to pay for, the value of these subsidies actually reaches a staggering seven percent of annual global GDP.
大多数企业与政府不愿意 为阻止灾难性的气候变化 进行这额外 2% 的必要投资。 那钱都去哪里了呢? 好吧,每两年, 全球 GDP 的大约 2.4% 会被花费在了一些 最终被浪费了的食物上。 政府每年会花费 差不多 5 千亿美金 在——等一下—— 在化石燃料的直接补贴上。 这意味着每三年半,政府就会签一张 价值约为全年全球 GDP 2% 的 丰厚大支票 作为礼物送给化石燃料行业。 如果考虑化石燃料行业所 在造成的社会和环境成本, 实际情况是更糟糕的。 但是化石燃料行业 并未被要求为此买单。 这些补贴的价值 实际上达到了惊人的 全年全球 GDP 的 7%。
Now consider tax evasion. It's estimated that the money hidden by the wealthy in tax havens is worth around 10 percent of global GDP. Every year, another 1.4 trillion dollars in profits is stashed offshore by corporations, which is equal to 1.6 percent of global GDP. To prevent the apocalypse, we'll probably need to impose some new taxes. But why not start with collecting the old ones?
现在来谈谈逃税, 据估计,富人们在 避税天堂所隐藏的资产 价值约为全球 GDP 的 10%。 每一年, 会有另外 1.4 万亿美元的利润 被各种公司藏匿在海外, 等价于全球 GDP 的 1.6%。 为了阻止灾难, 我们有可能需要征收一些新的税。 但为什么不先开始去征收 这些以前的税呢?
Such examples can be multiplied. But you get the picture. The money is there. Of course, collecting taxes, stopping food wastage and slashing subsidies is easier said than done, especially when faced by some of the most powerful lobbies in the world. But it doesn't require a miracle. It just requires determined organization.
这样的例子不胜枚举。 但你已经明白了, 钱已经在那里了。 当然,对于征税, 阻止食物浪费和削减补贴, 说起来比做起来更容易, 尤其是在面对一些这世界上 最强大的游说团体的时候。 但所需要的并不是奇迹。 所需要的只是决心坚定的组织。
So we shouldn't succumb to defeatism. Whenever someone says, "It's too late, the apocalypse is here," reply, "Nah, we can stop it with just two percent." And when COP 27 convenes in Egypt in November 2022, we should tell the attending leaders that it's not enough to make vague future pledges about 1.5 degrees Celsius. We want them to take out their pens and sign a check for two percent of annual global GDP.
所以我们不应该屈服于失败主义。 当有人说到: “已经太晚了, 大灾难已经到来了,” 回复他们:“不,只需要 2%, 我们就可以阻止灾难。” 联合国气候变化大会第 27 次缔约方会议 于 2022 年 11 月在埃及召开时, 我们应该告诉与会领导, 针对 1.5 摄氏度的目标给出 模糊的未来承诺是不够的。 我们想要他们拿出他们的笔, 签上这张 价值为全年全球 GDP 2% 的支票。
Thank you.
谢谢。