演講MP3+雙語(yǔ)文稿:我們能解決全球變暖嗎？

聽力課堂TED音頻欄目主要包括TED演講的音頻MP3及中英雙語(yǔ)文稿，供各位英語(yǔ)愛好者學(xué)習(xí)使用。本文主要內(nèi)容為演講MP3+雙語(yǔ)文稿:我們能解決全球變暖嗎？，希望你會(huì)喜歡！

【演講人及介紹】Sean Davis

研究科學(xué)家--塞恩·戴維斯（Sean Davis）研究了人為引起的大氣化學(xué)成分變化對(duì)氣候的影響。

【演講主題】我們能解決全球變暖嗎?從臭氧層保護(hù)中學(xué)到的經(jīng)驗(yàn)

【演講文稿-中英文】

翻譯者 Yichen Huang 校對(duì) psjmz mz

00:13

So, I'm a climate scientist, and if this room is representative of the country we live in, that means about 60 percent of you, so maybe from about there over, don't strongly trust me for information on the causes of climate change. Now, I promise to tell the truth tonight, but just to humor that demographic, I've started this talk with a falsehood.

我是一位氣候科學(xué)家，如果這個(gè)房間代表我們所處的國(guó)家，那么大約你們中的60%，差不多從那里一直到我的右邊，不相信我在氣候變化上的觀點(diǎn)。我保證今晚說的都是真話，但是為了那些不相信我的人，我會(huì)從一句假話談起。

00:39

[The Paris Climate Accord is a product of the recognition that climate change is a global problem ...]

[巴黎氣候協(xié)定是對(duì) 氣候變化的全球共識(shí)的產(chǎn)物]

00:44

This statement was not made by President Obama. It was made by President Reagan, and it wasn't about climate change and the Paris Climate Accord. It was actually about the Montreal Protocol and stratospheric ozone depletion.

這話不是奧巴馬總統(tǒng)說的。是里根總統(tǒng)說的。而且，它不是關(guān)于氣候變化 和巴黎氣候協(xié)定的，它其實(shí)是關(guān)于蒙提利爾協(xié)定 和平流層臭氧損耗的。

00:57

Now, I'm sure that many of you aren't familiar with this environmental problem, but you should be, because it's a rare environmental success story. And it's worth revisiting, because sometimes, we need to examine the world we've avoided in order to find guidance for the choices we make today.

我很確定你們當(dāng)中很多人 不太熟悉臭氧層問題，但你們應(yīng)該熟悉，因?yàn)檫@是一個(gè)很罕見的 成功的環(huán)保案例。這值得我們從中學(xué)習(xí)，因?yàn)橛袝r(shí)，我們需要從 所避免的環(huán)境災(zāi)難中學(xué)習(xí)，才能更好地做出當(dāng)下的選擇。

01:16

So let's go back to the 1970s, when some questionable choices were made: first of all -- hoo -- hairstyles. (Laughs) Second of all, objectively terrible quantities of hairspray, and third, CFCs, chlorofluorocarbons, man-made chemicals that were used as propellant in aerosol spray cans. And see, it turns out these CFCs were a problem because they were destroying the ozone layer.

讓我們回到1970年代。在那個(gè)時(shí)代，人們 做出了一些不當(dāng)?shù)倪x擇： 首先是發(fā)膠。（笑聲） 其次，客觀地說，質(zhì)量糟糕的噴發(fā)定型劑。第三，CFC，也就是氯氟烴。CFC是人造的化學(xué)品，被用作噴霧劑中的壓縮氣體。后來，人們發(fā)現(xiàn)CFC引發(fā)了一個(gè)問題，因?yàn)樗鼤?huì)破壞臭氧層。

01:47

Now I'm sure most of you have heard of the ozone layer, but why does it matter? Well, quite simply, the ozone layer is earth's sunscreen, and it's really fragile. If you could take all of the ozone, which is mostly about 10 to 20 miles up above our heads, and compress it down to the surface of the earth, it would form a thin shell only about two pennies thick, about an eighth of an inch. And that thin shell does an amazing amount of work, though. It filters out more than 90 percent of the harmful UV radiation coming from the sun. And while I'm sure many of you enjoy that suntan that you get from the remaining 10 percent, it causes a lot of problems: cataracts, damage to crops, damage to immune systems and also skin cancer. It's not an exaggeration to say that a threat to the ozone layer is a threat to human safety.

我很確定大多數(shù)人都聽說過臭氧層，為什么我們要在意臭氧層呢？ 簡(jiǎn)單來說，臭氧層是地球的防曬霜，而且它十分脆弱。臭氧大多都處于 地面以上20至25公里處，若你取得地球上所有臭氧，然后把它們壓縮在地球表面，它會(huì)形成大概有兩個(gè)分幣厚的薄層，大概3毫米厚。而這薄薄一層臭氧其實(shí)十分重要。它能抵御超過90%源自太陽(yáng)的 有害紫外線輻射。雖然我知道很多人都喜歡曬太陽(yáng)，但即使是剩下10%的 紫外線輻射也能造成很多麻煩： 如白內(nèi)障，損害農(nóng)作物，損傷免疫系統(tǒng)，以及皮膚癌。對(duì)臭氧層的威脅 就是對(duì)人類安全的威脅，并不是夸大其詞。

02:47

And actually, ironically, it was human safety that motivated the invention of CFCs in the first place. You see, in the early days of refrigeration, refrigerators used toxic and flammable chemicals like propane and ammonia. For good reason, the refrigeration industry wanted a safe alternative, and they found that in 1928, when a scientist named Thomas Midgley synthesized the first commercially viable CFCs. And in fact, Midgley famously inhaled CFCs and blew out a candle to demonstrate, at a scientific conference, that they were safe and nonflammable. And in fact, as a scientist, I can tell you there is no way you could get away with that kind of antic today. I mean, wow.

諷刺的是，正是處于對(duì)人類安全的擔(dān)憂，促成了氟利昂的發(fā)明。在電冰箱剛剛投入使用時(shí)，會(huì)使用有毒，易燃的化學(xué)品，如丙烷和氨。所以制冷工業(yè)想要一個(gè) 更安全的替代物，他們?cè)?928年找到了它。一位叫做Thomas Midgley的科學(xué)家 率先合成了商業(yè)上可用的CFC。事實(shí)上，Midgley在一場(chǎng)學(xué)術(shù)論壇上 親自吸入了CFC并用其吹滅了一支蠟燭，來證明CFC十分安全并不易燃。其實(shí)，作為一名科學(xué)家，我可以告訴你，現(xiàn)在你可沒辦法像他這樣演示。真的，這讓人感覺不可思議。

03:33

But really, at the time, CFCs were a really remarkable invention. They allowed what we now know as modern-day refrigeration and air-conditioning and other things. So it wasn't actually until over 40 years later, in the 1970s, when scientists realized that CFCs would break down high in the atmosphere and damage the ozone layer. And this finding really set off a lot of public concern. It led, ultimately, to the banning of CFC usage in aerosol spray cans in the US and a few other countries in 1978.

而在那時(shí)，CFC是一項(xiàng)十分卓越的發(fā)明。它促成了當(dāng)代的制冷技術(shù)，還有空調(diào)等等。直到四十年之后的1970年代，科學(xué)家們才意識(shí)到CFC 會(huì)在大氣層的高處降解，破壞臭氧層。這個(gè)發(fā)現(xiàn)引發(fā)了公眾的擔(dān)憂。最后在1978年，美國(guó)和一些其他國(guó)家禁止 在噴霧劑中使用CFC。

04:09

Now, the story doesn't end there, because CFCs were used in much more than just spray cans. In 1985, scientists discovered the Antarctic ozone hole, and this was a truly alarming discovery. Scientists did not expect this at all. Before the Antarctic ozone hole, scientists expected maybe a five or 10 percent reduction in ozone over a century. But what they found over the course of less than a decade was that more than a third of the ozone had simply vanished, over an area larger than the size of the US. And although we now know that CFCs are the root cause of this ozone hole, at the time, the science was far from settled. Yet despite this uncertainty, the crisis helped spur nations to act.

而故事可沒在那時(shí)結(jié)束，因?yàn)镃FC不止被用在噴霧劑中。在1985年，科學(xué)家發(fā)現(xiàn)了 南極上空的臭氧層空洞，這是一項(xiàng)十分讓人警醒的發(fā)現(xiàn)。科學(xué)家們完全沒有預(yù)料到。在此前，科學(xué)家們預(yù)期一個(gè)世紀(jì)中 大概會(huì)有5%至10%的 臭氧衰減。但他們發(fā)現(xiàn)，在不到十年中，在面積超過美國(guó)的地區(qū)上方，超過三分之一的臭氧消失了。雖然我們現(xiàn)在知道CFC 是臭氧層空洞的禍根，當(dāng)時(shí)，學(xué)術(shù)上還遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)沒有定論。而盡管有這樣的不確定性，那場(chǎng)危機(jī)卻得以 促使各個(gè)國(guó)家采取行動(dòng)。

05:02

So that quote that I started this talk with, about the Montreal Protocol, from President Reagan -- that was his signing statement when he signed the Montreal Protocol after its unanimous ratification by the US Senate. And this is something that's truly worth celebrating. In fact, yesterday was the 30th anniversary of the Montreal Protocol.

回到我開始時(shí)引用里根總統(tǒng) 關(guān)于蒙特利爾協(xié)定的那句話—— 那是美國(guó)參議院一致通過之后，里根總統(tǒng)簽訂協(xié)議時(shí)候的聲明。這是一件真正值得慶祝的事。其實(shí)，昨天就是蒙特利爾協(xié)定 簽訂的三十周年。

05:24

(Applause)

（掌聲)

05:30

Because of the protocol, ozone-depleting substances are now declining in our atmosphere, and we're starting to see the first signs of healing in the ozone layer. And furthermore, because many of those ozone-depleting substances are also very potent greenhouse gases, the Montreal Protocol has actually delayed global warming by more than a decade. That's just wonderful. But I think it's worth asking the question, as we face our current environmental crisis, global warming, what lessons can we learn from Montreal? Are there any? I think there are.

因?yàn)檫@項(xiàng)協(xié)定，大氣層中侵害臭氧的物質(zhì)正在減少，而我們也已經(jīng)看到了 臭氧層恢復(fù)的初步征兆。而且，因?yàn)楹芏嗲趾Τ粞醯奈镔|(zhì) 同時(shí)也是強(qiáng)力的溫室氣體，蒙特利爾協(xié)定將全球變暖的發(fā)生 推遲了十年。那太棒了。但我覺得我們應(yīng)該思索這個(gè)問題，特別是當(dāng)我們面對(duì)當(dāng)下 全球變暖的環(huán)境問題時(shí)，我們可以從蒙特利爾協(xié)定中學(xué)到什么？ 有值得借鑒之處嗎？我覺得有。

06:08

First, we don't need absolute certainty to act. When Montreal was signed, we were less certain then of the risks from CFCs than we are now of the risks from greenhouse gas emissions. A common tactic that people who oppose climate action use is to completely ignore risk and focus only on uncertainty. But so what about uncertainty? We make decisions in the face of uncertainty all the time, literally all the time. You know, I'll bet those of you who drove here tonight, you probably wore your seat belt. And so ask yourself, did you wear your seat belt because someone told you with a hundred percent [certainty] that you would get in a car crash on the way here? Probably not. So that's the first lesson. Risk management and decision making always have uncertainty. Ignoring risk and focusing only on uncertainty is a distraction. In other words, inaction is an action.

首先，我們并不需要 百分之百確定才采取行動(dòng)。當(dāng)蒙特利爾協(xié)定簽訂時(shí)，我們對(duì)于CFC的危害遠(yuǎn)不如 我們現(xiàn)在對(duì)溫室氣體的危害來的確定。有些反對(duì)針對(duì)氣候變化 采取行動(dòng)的人常用的說辭 就是無(wú)視風(fēng)險(xiǎn)而單單強(qiáng)調(diào)不確定性。不確定又如何呢？ 我們每時(shí)每刻都在面對(duì)不確定性。真的，每時(shí)每刻。我想你們很多人都是開車來這里的，你們大概系了安全帶。請(qǐng)想一下，你系安全帶是因?yàn)橛腥烁嬖V你，你有百分之百的可能 會(huì)在來這兒的路上出車禍嗎？ 大概不是。所以這就是我們學(xué)到的第一件事。風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理和決策制定永遠(yuǎn)都 伴隨著不確定性。忽視風(fēng)險(xiǎn)而專注于不確定性 只會(huì)分散我們的注意力。換句話說，不做選擇也是一種選擇。

07:16

Second, it takes a village to raise a healthy environment. The Montreal Protocol wasn't just put together by industry and governments or environmental advocacy groups and scientists. It was put together by all of them. They all had a seat at the table, and they all played an important role in the solution. And I think in this regard, we're actually seeing some encouraging signs today. We see not just environmental groups concerned about climate change but also civic and religious groups, the military and businesses. So wherever you find yourself on that spectrum, we need you at the table, because if we're going to solve global warming, it's going to take actions at all levels, from the individual to the international and everything in between.

第二，創(chuàng)造健康的環(huán)境 需要來自多方的努力。蒙特利爾協(xié)定不僅僅 是由行業(yè)機(jī)構(gòu)和政府 或是環(huán)保活動(dòng)家和科學(xué)家單獨(dú)制定的，而是由他們所有人一起制定的。他們都有所參與，都在解決臭氧層問題中發(fā)揮了重要作用。我想在這個(gè)方面，我們?cè)诮裉煲沧龅煤芎谩Ｎ覀儾粌H看到環(huán)保組織 致力于對(duì)抗氣候變化，還有公民運(yùn)動(dòng)和宗教組織，軍事組織和商業(yè)組織。所以不管你是誰(shuí)，我們需要你的參與，因?yàn)榻鉀Q全球變暖 需要各個(gè)層面的行動(dòng)，從個(gè)人到國(guó)際，還有兩者之間的每個(gè)層面。

08:08

Third lesson: don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. While Montreal has become the brake pedal for stopping ozone depletion, at its beginning, it was more just like a tap on the brakes. It was actually the later amendments to the protocol that really marked the decision to hit the brakes on ozone depletion.

第三點(diǎn)： 不要拘泥于完美而止步不前。雖然蒙特利爾協(xié)定最終 成為了臭氧損耗的休止符，在最開始，它的效果并不明顯。其實(shí)是之后對(duì)協(xié)定的修正 真正阻止了臭氧損耗。

08:33

So to those who despair that the Paris Climate Accord didn't go far enough or that your limited actions on their own won't solve global warming, I say don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. And finally, I think it helps us to contemplate the world we've avoided. Indeed, the world we have avoided by enacting the Montreal Protocol is one of catastrophic changes to our environment and to human well-being. By the 2030s, we'll be avoiding millions of new skin cancer cases per year with a number that would only grow. If I'm lucky, I'll live long enough to see the end of this animation and to see the ozone hole restored to its natural state.

所以對(duì)那些悲觀主義者，他們覺得巴黎氣候協(xié)定做的遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠，或是一個(gè)人的努力解決不了全球變暖，我會(huì)說，不要拘泥于完美而止步不前。最后，我想這有助于 我反思所避免的危害。的確，我們通過蒙特利爾協(xié)定避免的 是對(duì)環(huán)境和人類的 災(zāi)難性的變化。到2030年，我們會(huì)避免每年 數(shù)以百萬(wàn)計(jì)的皮膚癌病例 這個(gè)數(shù)字只會(huì)增長(zhǎng)。如果我夠幸運(yùn)，就能夠 見證這場(chǎng)變化的結(jié)尾，看到臭氧層恢復(fù)到它原初的狀態(tài)。

09:24

So as we write the story for earth's climate future for this century and beyond, we need to ask ourselves, what will our actions be so that someone can stand on this stage in 30 or 50 or a hundred years to celebrate the world that they've avoided.

所以，當(dāng)我們?cè)谶@個(gè)世紀(jì)以及未來 書寫地球氣候的歷史時(shí)。我們要問自己，我們要做什么 才能讓30，50，或者100年后，有人能夠站在這個(gè)舞臺(tái)上，慶祝他們避免的種種災(zāi)害。

09:43

Thank you.

謝謝。

09:44

(Applause)

（掌聲）

由于字?jǐn)?shù)限制，詳細(xì)字幕請(qǐng)點(diǎn)擊“詞”獲取。