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.
當環境問題一惡化 太多人從拒絕相信事實 直接陷入恐慌 我們其實不應該失去信心 人類掌握著龐大的資源 只要妥善運用 仍然可以阻止生態浩劫
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.
來講數據吧 要花多少錢才能阻止氣候災變? 需要投入一半的總預算嗎? 還是百分之三十? 百分之十? 當然,沒有人能肯定 我的團隊花了好幾週的時間 讀遍各種報告和學術論文 沉浸在數字海洋中 僅管各種數字模型令人眼花撩亂 最終結果卻令人振奮 大多數專家將結論定在百分之二
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.
只要人類投資更多錢在綠色能源 以及相關設備 大約是全球 GDP 的百分之二 這就足夠用來阻止氣候災變了
If you want to see how experts got to that number, you're welcome to visit the Sapienship website.
如果有人想知道專家怎麼算出的數字 歡迎到 Sapienship 網站查詢
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.
當然,對於正確數字的爭論永無止盡 各種模型不斷調整 我們應該綜觀全貌 重點在於,阻止末日的成本已明碼標價 只要每年 GDP 的小小百分比 就算是最悲觀的模型 預估的數字也沒有超過百分之五 而大部分的模型 都說只需要把百分之二的全球 GDP 放到對的地方
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.
注意「投資」這個詞 說的可不是焚燒鈔票以祭天 好安撫地球的英靈這種事 這裡指的是要投資新技術、新設備 例如先進電池或其他技術 用來儲存太陽能 以及升級配電網 這些投資將會創造新的工作機會 與經濟潛力 長期下來很可能使經濟成長 能使我們減少醫療照護支出 百萬人不再受害於空氣污染造成的疾病 另外,石油和天然氣通常是專制 和軍事政權最主要的倚仗 減少對石化燃料的倚賴 對於民主與和平大大有益 只需要將這些化成具體的政治行動
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.
我們以往的目標是基於這個數字: 攝氏 1.5 度 為了達成目標我們要定出另一個數字: 2% 增加對環保技術和設備的投資 花費全球 GDP 的百分之二 以 2020 年的經濟水平來算 這或許不像攝氏 1.5 度 是一個通過科學鑑定的數字 2% 是一個大致上的預估 是一個可參考的數據 用來規劃出 人類所需的政治行動計畫 這個數字告訴我們:想阻止氣候災變 是可以辦得到的 雖然要花一大筆錢
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 年的全球 GDP 大約是 85 兆美元 所以成本算出來約莫 1.7 兆美元 這仍只有百分之二 也就是說為了保護環境 我們沒必要傷害到經濟 也不必放棄現代文明的成果 只需要確認優先次序
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.
投入百分之二的全球年度 GDP 當然離成功還差得遠 無法解決所有生態問題 比如充斥海洋的塑膠袋、 生物多樣性的惡化等等 甚至連阻止氣候災變這一問題 我們也需要確保這筆錢花到正確的地方 以及新的投資項目不會產生 更多的生態或社會問題 我們也必須改變一些行為 和思考模式 從飲食到旅遊習慣
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.
這些都不容易 而這就是政客們該出力的時候了 政客的工作就是處理這些麻煩事 他們其實挺擅長把百分之二的資源 從這挪到那 這是他們一直以來做的事 左翼和右翼政黨 政策的差別 通常就在那幾個百分點的 GDP 罷了 每當面對重大危機 他們總能迅速挪用大量資源來補破網
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.
舉個 1945 年的例子 美國花了約 36% 的 GDP 贏得了第二次世界大戰 而 2008~2009 年金融危機時 美國也花了 3.5% 的 GDP 用來救那些「大到不能倒」 的金融機構 或許人類也該將亞馬遜雨林 視為「大到不能倒」
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.
我們試一個想法實驗 根據南美洲目前已經被砍伐掉雨林 的土地價格 以及亞馬遜雨林的面積 買下整個雨林,保護當地森林、 生物多樣性以及人類社群, 避免被商業行為毀滅 大約要花 8 千億美元 也就是一次性花掉不到百分之一的 全球 GDP
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,
2020 年的前九個月 全世界的政府都曾頒布刺激經濟的政策 花掉約等於 14% 的全球 GDP 來對抗新冠病毒疫情 人民如果強烈要求 政客可以為生態危機發布一樣的政策 投資銀行和退休基金也能做出貢獻 退休基金裡的存款超過 56 兆美元 人類若沒有未來,存退休金有何用? 目前
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.
大部分的企業和政府都不願意 挪出那百分之二的資金 投注到必須阻止的氣候災變上 那些錢都去哪裡了呢? 每兩年 大約 2.4% 的全球 GDP 都花在處理浪費掉的食物 政府每年還會將 5 千億美元 你想的到嗎 直接用來補助化石燃料 也就是說每三年半,政府就會寫一張 豐厚的支票 等值百分之二的全球 GDP 然後包裝送給石化燃料產業當禮物 更誇張的還有那些社會環境補助金 是化石燃料產業造成了這些成本 卻沒有為此買單 這些補助的金額 甚至達到了全球百分之七的 GDP
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?
再來想想逃漏稅 那些被富豪們藏在避稅天堂的金額 估計約有百分之十的全球 GDP 每一年 又有 1.4 兆盈利的收入 被公司們藏到海外 約等於全球 1.6% 的 GDP 為了阻止末日 我們很可能需要課徵新稅 但為何不從追回這些逃漏稅開始?
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.
這些例子比比皆是 現在你了解了 錢一直都在那裡 當然,收稅、 停止食物浪費、削減補助等 說的容易做時難 尤其是面對世界上話語權最大的族群 但我們不需要奇蹟 只要有下定決心的組織
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.
不要對失敗主義低頭 每當有人說: 「太晚啦,世界末日早就來了。」 就這樣回他:「不會啦, 2% 就可以救地球!」 當 2022 年氣候變遷會議 (COP 27) 在埃及召開 告訴參與的國家代表們 不能只是對攝氏 1.5 度 做出對未來的模糊承諾 要讓他們掏出筆 簽下一張支票 承諾交出百分之二的全球年度 GDP
Thank you.
謝謝