How To Fix The "Bugs" In The Net-Zero Code | Lucas Joppa | TED Countdown

翻译人员: 新 陈 校对人员: Helen Chang

When I was a kid, I lived in a pretty analog world.

我小时候生活的世界 是一个万物模拟的世界。

But then, that all started to quickly change.

后来，一切都开始飞速变化。

My music, my communications, my social networks --

无论是听歌，通信还是社交——

everything started to become digital.

一切都迈入了数字时代。

And the force behind it all was this thing that seemed,

好像有一股神奇的力量 在背后推动着，

at least to me at the time, almost magical.

至少对于那时的我来说是这样。

This thing called "software."

而这股力量就是“程序”。

But then, over time,

但是，随着时间的推移，

我明白了程序并没有什么神奇之处，

I realized that software isn't magic, it's just logic.

它只是遵循一定的逻辑运行而已。

It's code that tells the computer what to do and how to do it.

真正向计算机发出指令， 明确其任务以及执行步骤的是代码。

And that early realization really still sits at the core

早早地明白这一点， 至今仍极大地影响着

of how I view my job as Microsoft's Chief Environmental Officer,

我对微软首席环境官 这份工作的理解。

where I help the company play its part in developing the code

我的职责是帮助公司 参与开发一个代码

behind one of the most complex programs the world has ever dared to develop:

去操控全世界最大胆、 最复杂的程序中的其中一个程序：

a program that takes, as input, all of the carbon

这个程序需要你输入

全球经济活动所产生的 全部碳排放量，

associated with all of the economic activity on the planet,

and returns, as output, the value zero.

然后你会得到一个结果，数值零。

Zero additional carbon accumulating in the atmosphere

也就是到2050年 达到“碳中和”，

by the year 2050.

实现二氧化碳的“零排放”。

Now Microsoft's contribution to this is both simple and ambitious.

微软对此的贡献既简单又雄心勃勃。

By 2030, we’ve committed to reduce our emissions by half or more

到2030年，微软承诺碳排放量 将减少至少一半，

and then physically remove the rest from the atmosphere.

剩余的那一部分，我们会将其 从大气中彻底清除。

And then, from 2030 to 2050,

2030年到2050年期间，

to continue not just zeroing out our annual emissions,

我们除了会继续致力于 将每年的碳排放量清零，

but to go back in time and remove all the emissions we're associated with

还会清除自1975年创立以来

since we were founded in 1975.

和公司有关的所有碳排放。

(Applause)

(掌声)

Thank you.

谢谢。

And what we've learned as a result

我们为这一目标付出了 近两年的努力，

of our almost two years working towards this target

我们从中认识到，

is that any developer of a net-zero carbon program

所有净零碳排放程序的开发者

really faces the same challenges that your typical software engineer might.

实际上面临着传统意义上的软件工程师 都可能会面临的挑战。

They must avoid bugs in their code.

那就是他们都必须 避免代码出现任何漏洞。

Bugs are errors that cause a program not to work

所谓漏洞，就是代码错误，

or to do things that its author didn't intend or doesn't understand.

会让程序无法正常运行，违背开发者意图 甚至开发者也搞不明白发生了什么。

And if you know anything about software,

假如你对程序多少有些了解的话，

you know that bugs are bad.

你就会知道出现漏洞可不是什么好事。

Well, unfortunately, what's become clear

可遗憾的是， 有一点越来越显而易见，

is that there are already a few clearly significant bugs

那就是，尚处于早期发展阶段的 全球净零程序

in the world's early net-zero program.

存在一些巨大漏洞。

For instance, we lack a common meaning of the term “net-zero.”

比如，我们对“零碳”一词 尚未形成全球统一的定义。

We lack a common unit of measurement

我们尚未确立一个 国际通用的计量单位，

to assess the climate impact of any net-zero approach.

用以衡量每项零碳举措的成效。

And we’re failing to mature the markets the world will need

目前来看，市场尚未发展成熟，

to achieve a net-zero carbon economy by 2050.

尚不足以在2050年 实现零碳经济。

And so what I want to do is just go into a few details, I guess,

基于此，我想深入谈谈

on each of these bugs,

这些漏洞，

and then talk really quickly

再简要谈谈

about how I think we might be able to fix them.

如何修复这些漏洞。

And first up is the meaning of “net-zero.”

首先，我想谈谈“净零”的含义。

Now, the global definition of net-zero is pretty simple:

当前国际上对“净零”的定义 再简单不过：

all of the carbon that humans put into the atmosphere,

人类必须将所有因人类活动产生的碳

humans must take out.

从大气中清除掉。

That sounds supersimple; as we all know,

这听上去简直小菜一碟； 但是众所周知，

it's turning out to be extremely difficult to do,

落实起来难如登天，

but that's especially so if you have not ensured alignment

更何况公民个人、组织机构 以及国际社会

between individual, organizational and global definitions of “net-zero.”

对于“零碳”的定义 都意见不一呢？

And I want to talk, just really quickly, about what I mean by that.

简单解释一下。

And, to use an example to do so,

举个例子，

let's pretend that you want to go on vacation,

比方说你要去度假，

a vacation that's going to require transportation, food and lodging,

你需要乘坐交通工具、就餐和住宿，

all activities that will emit, let's say,

假设这些活动会向大气中排放，

three tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere.

三吨的碳。

But you want your trip to be net-zero.

但你希望你这趟行程是“净零”的。

Well, today, you really have three options.

那么现在你有三个选择。

You could, of course, simply decide not to go,

当然，你可以直接选择不去度假，

in which case your trip wouldn’t be net-zero,

这样你的行程不是“净零”，

it would be absolute zero.

而是“绝对的零碳排放”。

Or you could decide to continue on with your trip,

要么，你还是选择去度假，

but in this case, pay somebody, on your behalf,

这种情况下，你就得付钱给别人，

to not emit three tonnes of carbon that they otherwise would have.

不排放这三吨碳就成了别人的任务。

Now, in accounting parlance,

用碳足迹计算术语来说，

this is what's called an avoided emissions offset.

这叫做碳抵消。

But it comes with a catch.

但它带有陷阱。

Because while you may now be able to claim your emissions to be net-zero,

因为即使你声称通过碳抵消，

and thus, your trip to be net-zero,

做到了“净零”排放，

as a result of canceling out your emissions with those of someone else,

进而使得这趟行程“净零”，

you're relying on an approach that we know simply can't scale

你所采取的方法

还是无法放大到全球“净零”目标。

to a global net-zero outcome.

And the reason that that is true

原因就在于

is simply because carbon will still be emitted, although less,

还是有碳被排放到大气中， 虽然量减少了，

but not removed.

但是这些碳并没有被完全清除掉。

In the third option --

你还有一种选择——

it's similar to the second --

和第二种选择类似——

you're going to continue to go on your trip,

你还是决定要去度假，

but in this case, you're going to pay somebody

不同的是，你会花钱

to physically remove three tonnes of carbon

让他人代替你

from the atmosphere on your behalf.

去真正清除掉 大气中的这3吨碳。

And this type of payment, called a carbon-removal offset,

这种支付方式叫做碳移除，

could theoretically scale from individual, to organizational,

理论上能够实现从个人到组织机构，

to global net-zero outcomes.

最终到全球的“净零”目标。

But in order to do so,

但是要达到这个结果，

it's going to have to have significant technological advances and breakthroughs

必须有重大的科技进步和创新作支撑，

to achieve the scale necessary.

从而形成足够的规模。

But the point here is really simple:

道理很简单：

it's that in today's terminology, zero is not always zero.

目前“零碳”并不是在任何情形下 都意味着“零”。

It depends on your definition.

看你怎么定义它。

And that is a problem.

那问题就产生了。

And it's a problem that brings us to the second bug in our net-zero program:

这就要谈到“零碳”程序的 另一个漏洞：

problems with measurement,

测量方面的漏洞，

and specifically,

具体来说就是，

problems with the way that we do or don't measure

在哪种情况下我们需要 测量碳抵消对气候的影响，

the climate impacts of different carbon offsets.

在哪种情况下不需要。

Because not all offsets are created equal.

因为不是所有的碳抵消都“生而平等”。

The additionality of a project,

项目是否有额外的减排效果，

the certainty with which you know that carbon will be avoided or removed,

投资人是否对碳抵消或碳移除抱有信心，

the duration of time over which your investment will remain valid.

投资的有效期，

Those and a whole host of other factors --

以上这些以及其他一些因素——

they all influence the climate impacts of your investments.

全部都会对你的投资产生影响。

But today, we don't do enough to measure those differences.

目前我们对这些变量的计算 做的还不够好。

And we have to do better,

还要做得更好，

because if we can't appropriately measure

因为如果我们不能正确计算出

the climate impacts that those differences represent,

这些变量对气候变化的影响，

then we'll never be able to appropriately assign

我们也就无法对任一碳抵消举措

the correct monetary value to any particular offset.

做出合理的价值估算。

And if we can't get the valuation right,

如果我们不能从气候变化和金融层面

from both a climate and a financial perspective,

做出正确估算，

then we're not going to mature the markets that we need.

我们就无法建立所需的成熟市场。

And the reason for this is actually pretty simple,

原因实际上很简单，

because it turns out to be relatively cheap

那就是，花钱将任务转移给他人

to pay somebody to stop doing something.

相对来说更划算。

And so avoided emissions offsets

碳抵消每吨

can often be purchased for less than 10 dollars

往往花费

per tonne of carbon avoided.

不到10美元

Carbon-removal offsets, on the other hand,

而每移除一吨碳

often span prices from the high tens, to hundreds, to low thousands of dollars

则会花费少则几千、几万，

per tonne of carbon removed,

多则十几万美元不等，

particularly for advanced technology solutions,

那些采用先进科技的项目更是如此，

like direct air capture,

碳捕获就是这样，

which literally sucks carbon out of the atmosphere

简单来说就是吸出大气中的碳

and stores it permanently deep under the Earth's surface.

并将它储存在地表深处。

But if each of these types of offsets counted the same

但如果计算碳足迹时，

for your carbon accounting,

以上三种碳抵消行为等值，

which would you choose?

你会做出何种选择呢？

Well, most organizations will choose the cheapest option,

大多数组织机构会选择 成本最低的那一个，

and that might make sense for them from a financial perspective,

从经济层面看，并非没有道理，

but it causes significant market dysfunction

但是这会导致市场无法正常运转，

because it starves early, emerging and scalable solutions

因为那些新兴的、发展尚不成熟 却能日具规模的项目得不到支持，

that we know we will need in the future;

尽管我们日后会需要这些项目。

it starves them of desperately needed, early capital,

这些项目得不到急需的 早期资本支持，

and it ultimately slows or stunts their growth.

最终发展缓慢或滞后。

And at Microsoft, we’ve experienced this, because for nearly a decade,

微软就曾遇到过这种情况， 因为在政策调整之前的十年左右时间里，

we were a significant purchaser of avoided emissions offsets,

我们都购买大宗的碳抵消，

before switching our strategy to only purchasing carbon removal.

后来才购买碳移除。

And in fact, just last year,

事实上，仅去年一年，

we purchased 1.3 million metric tons of carbon removal.

我们购买了130万公吨的碳移除。

And as a result of that purchase,

这次交易，

what we learned is that Microsoft's demand alone

使我们明白仅微软一家公司的需求量

represents a significant fraction of all of the carbon removal

就占了国际市场上 现有的碳移除交易额度的

available on the world's markets today.

很大一部分。

And so when you take this all together,

考虑到这些，

what you quickly realize is that the world's early net-zero program

你就能很快明白 当今世界尚未成熟的“净零”程序

simply won't compute.

无法做出估算。

It's predicated on a poorly defined program structure,

它搭建在一个 定义尚不完善的程序架构上，

where carbon is still emitted, but not removed,

在这一架构中，人们依旧排放碳， 而非将它完全清除，

and where markets don't mature.

市场也尚未成熟。

Now that all sounds pretty depressing,

这一切听起来很令人灰心丧气，

and I would say I wouldn't be doing my job

但如果我对解决这些问题不抱信心，

if I didn't think these problems could be fixed,

觉得这些漏洞无法修复的话，

if I didn't think that these bugs in the software couldn't be bashed.

我就没有尽到职责。

But doing so is going to require all of us to accept

但是这要我们承认

an extremely significant amount of urgency,

解决这件事刻不容缓，

to realize that there is a whole lot of hard work ahead,

明白还有很多事情要做，

and the need for a plan.

并且需要为此制定一个方案。

A four-point plan -- at least in my opinion,

一个四步走方案—— 至少我是这么认为的，

there needs to be a four-point plan --

方案要包括以下四点——

a plan that shares a single, common, global definition of net-zero,

第一，必须确立全球统一的 关于“零碳”的定义，

not an organizational or individual one.

而不是由组织或个人给出的定义，

A plan that deploys a single common unit of measurement

第二，必须确立一个统一的测量单位，

so that we can appropriately compare and contrast

这样我们就能恰当地评估

the climate and financial impacts of any type of net-zero investment.

任何一种“净零”投资对 气候变化和经济的影响。

A plan that records the carbon inputs and outputs

第三，要记录各个国家和组织机构的

of every organization and country on Earth

输入和输出的碳排放数值，

so that we can appropriately map out and assess progress

从而准确地规划和评估

towards a net-zero future.

“净零”进程。

And a plan that uses market maturation

最后，必须发展市场，

at such a scale that develops markets

使之形成足够的规模，

to the scale that the world needs for every individual and organization

从而满足公民个人 和组织机构的需求。

so that they can rely on these markets,

这样就能依靠这些市场，

not just a few individuals and a few organizations.

而不仅仅是少数个人和组织机构。

And so we now find ourselves collectively coding this program update

如今我们都在争分夺秒，

against the clock,

齐心协力在为程序更新编写代码，

and the urgency could not be greater.

而时间非常紧迫。

But what I want to urge everyone is to constantly remind ourselves

我希望大家能够时时提醒自己

to always predicate our work on logic.

要基于逻辑进行编码工作。

Because if we can do that,

因为如果我们能够这样做的话，

then we can be confident in our ability

我们就有理由相信我们有能力

to pull off the most seemingly magical feat of all:

去实现几乎无法实现的壮举，那就是：

a recoding of our current course on climate change

重新编码我们为应对气候变化的路途，

and a promise for a more sustainable future

并承诺我们的子孙后代

to generations to come.

一个可持续的未来。

Thank you.

谢谢各位。

(Applause)

(掌声)