We need to track the world's water like we track the weather | Sonaar Luthra

翻译人员: Shengmin Huang 校对人员: Yolanda Zhang

We need to build a weather service for water.

我们需要为水资源 建立一个气象服务台。

Yet, until we collectively demand accountability,

但在我们能够 一致对此问责前，

the incentives to fund it will not exist.

它不具备成立的因素。

The first time I spoke at a conference was here at TED, eight years ago.

八年前，我正是在TED平台 发表了我的第一次公众演讲。

Fresh out of grad school, little did I know

刚毕业的我未曾想到，

that in those few minutes onstage,

在台上数分钟内罗列的问题，

I was framing the questions I was going to be asked

我将用此后的十年时间

for the next decade.

去作答。

And, like too many 20-somethings,

而就像许多二十啷当岁的青年，

I expected to solve the world's problems --

我期盼自己 能解决世界难题——

more specifically, the world's water problems --

具体来说， 是想用自己的技术

with my technology.

来解决全球水质问题。

I had a lot to learn.

我要学的东西还有很多。

It was seductive,

人们容易相信这么个论点：

believing that our biggest water quality problems persist

最严峻的水质问题 依然攻克不下，

because they're so hard to identify.

是因为水质鉴定非常困难。

And I presumed

我也曾以为

that we just needed simpler, faster and more affordable sensors.

我们只要有了更简单、更快捷、 更便宜的检测器就够了。

I was wrong.

我错了。

While it's true that managing tomorrow's water risk

虽然我们确实需要 更好的数据与更高的技术

is going to require better data and more technology,

来为明日的水质做风险管理，

today we're barely using the little water data that we have.

但今时今日我们都还不能够 充分利用现有的为数不多的数据。

Our biggest water problems persist because of what we don't do

最严峻的水质问题依然攻克不下， 是因为有些事情我们没有做到、

and the problems we fail to acknowledge.

有些问题我们没能察觉。

There's actually little question

作为地球上的一个物种，

about what today's water data is telling us to do as a species:

我们人类能从现有的 水质数据读出的信息也很明确：

we need to conserve more,

我们要节约环保，

and we need to pollute less.

我们要减少污染。

But today's data is not going to help us forecast the emerging risks

但是目前的水质数据 并不能帮助我们预测

facing businesses and markets.

即将来临的面对商业与市场的风险。

It's rapidly becoming useless for that.

目前的数据对此愈加一无是处。

It used to carry more value,

此类数据在过去更具价值，

but it's never actually told us with any real accuracy

但它们从未准确地告诉过我们

how much water we have

具体的水量

or what's in it.

或是水中的成份。

Let's consider the past decade of water usage statistics

让我们回顾过去十年里 来自各个G20成员国的

from each of the G20 nations.

用水量统计数据。

Now, what these numbers do not tell you

这里的数字没有告诉你们的是，

is that none of these countries directly measures how much water they use.

那些成员国中没有一个国家 给出了用水量的直接测量值。

These are all estimates,

这些数字都是估计值，

and they're based on outdated models

而且是由他们根据那些 既没考虑气候危机，

that don't consider the climate crisis,

也没考虑其对水资源影响的

nor do they consider its impact on water.

过时模型计算得出的。

In 2015, Chennai, India's sixth-largest city,

2015年，印度的第六大城市，金奈，

was hit with the worst floods it had seen in a century.

遭受了百年来 最严重的洪水袭击。

Today, its water reservoirs are nearly dry.

而今天，那里的水库几近干枯。

It took three years to get here,

仅三年，降雨量低于平均值的三年，

three years of subaverage rainfall.

就成了这幅光景。

Now, that's faster than most nations tabulate their national water data,

大多数国家，包括美国， 将全国水资源数据收集制表的速度

including the US.

都跟不上这样的干枯速度。

And although there were forecasts

而且虽然有过几次

that predicted severe shortages of water in Chennai,

对金奈市水资源短缺的预报，

none of them could actually help us pinpoint exactly when or where

但它们无一明确指明水资源短缺

this was going to happen.

会在何时何地发生。

This is a new type of water problem,

这是一类新的水资源问题，

because the rate at which every aspect of our water cycle changes

因为水循环的各个环节

is accelerating.

都在加速变化。

As a recent UN warning this month revealed,

正如近期联合国 在本月警告所示，

we are now facing one new climate emergency every single week.

我们每一周都面临着 一个新的气候危况。

There are greater uncertainties ahead for water quality.

在水质方面存在着更大的不确定性。

It's rare in most countries for most water bodies to be tested

绝大多数国家在一年内 对国内大部分水体

for more than a handful of contaminants in a year.

进行污染物检测的次数屈指可数。

Instead of testing, we use what's called the "dilution model"

我们现在用于污染管控 的方式不是检测，

to manage pollution.

而是一种名为“稀释模型”的方法。

Now, imagine I took an Olympic-sized swimming pool,

试想在一个奥运规格的泳池内

I filled it with fresh water and I added one drop of mercury.

注满清水，并加入一滴水银。

That would dilute down to one part per billion mercury,

这能将水银稀释至十亿分之一，

which is well within what the World Health Organization

也就是在世界卫生组织看来

considers safe.

算是安全的程度。

But if there was any unforeseen drop in how much water was available --

但如果有这么一滴未被察觉到 的水银滴入地下水含量更少、

less groundwater, less stream flow, less water in the pool --

流量更弱、 水量更少的游泳池中，

less dilution would take place,

稀释效果就会更弱，

and things would get more toxic.

水里的毒性就会更强。

So this is how most countries are managing pollution.

而这就是大多数国家 的污染管理之道。

They use this model to tell them how much pollution is safe.

他们用这个模型告诉人们 什么程度的污染能算安全。

And it has clear weaknesses,

这种方法有着明显的缺陷，

but it worked well enough when we had abundant water

但它在水源充足 与气象规律稳定的条件下

and consistent weather patterns.

还是能够达到目的。

Now that we don't, we're going to need to invest and develop

可现在，条件不允许了， 我们需要投资开发

new data-collection strategies.

全新的数据收集方案。

But before we do that, we have to start acting on the data we already have.

但在我们开始实施前， 我们得从已有的数据着手。

This is a jet fuel fire.

这火来自航空燃油。

As many of you may be aware,

正如你们许多人所知，

jet fuel emissions play an enormous role in climate change.

航空燃油排放对气候变化 有着相当程度的影响。

What you might not be aware of is that the US Department of Defense

但不为你们所知的是， 美国国防部

is the world's largest consumer of jet fuel.

正是全球最大的 航空燃油购买方。

And when they consume jet fuel,

在购买航空燃油的同时，

they mandate the use of the firefighting foam pictured here,

他们还允许使用 图片所示的消防泡沫，

which contains a class of chemicals called PFAS.

这种泡沫里含有一类叫做PFAS (全氟烷基磺酸盐 )的化学成分。

Nobody uses more of this foam than the US Department of Defense,

在这种消防泡沫的用量上 美国国防部无人能及，

and every time it's used, PFAS finds its way into our water systems.

而且每次使用，PFAS都会 以某种方式进入供水系统。

Globally, militaries have been using this foam since the 1970s.

全球各国军队从20世纪70年代起 就开始使用这种消防泡沫了。

We know PFAS causes cancer, birth defects,

我们知道PFAS会导致 癌症、先天性缺陷，

and it's now so pervasive in the environment

而现在它们在环境中遍布之广， 我们几乎能在

that we seem to find it in nearly every living thing we test,

所有生物测试对象中检测到它们，

including us.

包括人体。

But so far, the US Department of Defense has not been held accountable

但是到目前为止，还没人 就PFAS污染一事

for PFAS contamination,

向美国国防部问责，

nor has it been held liable.

国防部也从未表示过要对此负责。

And although there's an effort underway to phase out these firefighting foams,

尽管当局正致力于 逐步淘汰这些灭火泡沫，

they're not embracing safer, effective alternatives.

但他们并未采用更安全， 更有效的替代方法。

They're actually using other PFAS molecules,

他们实际采用的是 其它的PFAS分子，

which may, for all we know, carry worse health consequences.

就我们所知，这可能会招致 更严重的健康问题。

So today, government accountability is eroding to the point of elimination,

时至今日，政府问责机制 日渐淡化，形同虚设，

and the risk of liability from water pollution is vanishing.

这样政府对水质污染担责 的风险也就越来越小了。

What types of incentives does this create for investing in our water future?

这会对我们给水资源的未来做投资 产生什么样的激励？

Over the past decade, the average early stage global investment

在过去的十年里，全球每年针对 一众处于早期阶段的

in early stage water technology companies

水资源相关科技公司 的初期平均投资

has totaled less than 30 million dollars every year.

总数不及三千万美元。

That's 0.12 percent of global venture capital for early stage companies.

在对全球初期公司的 风险投资里占0.12%

And public spending is not going up nearly fast enough.

而且公共支出的 增长速度也远跟不上。

And a closer look at it reveals that water is not a priority.

再一细看就会发现水资源 并非人们优先考虑的问题。

In 2014, the US federal government was spending 11 dollars per citizen

2014年，美国联邦政府 在供水的基础设施上

on water infrastructure,

为每个公民花费了11美元，

versus 251 dollars on IT infrastructure.

而在信息技术的基础设施上 花费了251美元。

So when we don't use the data we have,

所以如果我们不能 擅用我们现有的数据，

we don't encourage investment in new technologies,

我们就没法鼓励人们为新技术投资，

we don't encourage more data collection

没法鼓励人们收集更多的数据

and we certainly don't encourage investment in securing a water future.

自然也没法鼓励人们 为未来的水质安全投资。

So are we doomed?

人类就这样毁了？

Part of what I'm still learning

我目前正研究的其中一个问题，

is how to balance the doom and the urgency with things we can do,

是如何物尽其用 在毁灭与危急状态间做平衡，

because Greta Thunberg and the Extinction Rebellion

因为格雷塔·图恩伯格 与“反抗灭绝”组织需要的

don't want our hope -- they want us to act.

不是我们的期许， 他们要的是我们的行动。

So what can we do?

那么我们能做什么？

It's hard to imagine life without a weather service,

没有气象台的生活是难以想象的，

but before modern weather forecasting,

但在现代气象预测技术出现之前，

we had no commercial air travel,

我们是没有商务航空的，

it was common for ships to be lost at sea,

船舶在海洋中迷失屡见不鲜，

and a single storm could produce a food shortage.

光一场风暴 就能造成食物短缺。

Once we had radio and telegraph networks,

而在我们发明了无线电与电报网络后，

all that was necessary to solve these problems

我们仅需要跟踪着风暴的动态，

was tracking the movement of storms.

这些问题就迎刃而解了。

And that laid the foundation for a global data collection effort,

这也为全球数据收集 成为当今家家户户、

one that every household and every business depends upon today.

各行各业都用得上的技术 奠定了基础。

And this was as much the result of coordinated and consistent data collection

能够创造一种更重视公开评定，

as it was the result of producing a culture that saw greater value

并在面对危机时能就其 所知所见知无不言的文化，

和能够使用相互协调、 持续产生的数据

in openly assessing and sharing everything that it could find out and discover

about the risks we face.

所带来的结果同样重要。

A global weather service for water would help us forecast water shortages.

建立一个水资源的全球气象服务台 能帮助我们预测水资源短缺；

It could help us implement rationing well before reservoirs run dry.

能帮助我们在水库枯竭之前 就实施定量配给；

It could help us detect contamination before it spreads.

能帮助我们在污染扩散之前 就可将其检测出来；

It could protect our supply chains,

还能保护我们的供应链，

secure our food supplies,

为我们的食品供应把关，

and, perhaps most importantly,

也许最重要的是，

it would enable the precise estimation of risk

这能精确评估风险，

necessary to insure against it.

从而确定必须承担的责任。

We know we can do this because we've already done it with weather.

我们知道这些事情能实现， 因为我们已经实现了气象跟踪。

But it's going to require resources.

但这会对资源有要求。

We need to encourage greater investment in water.

我们得鼓励更多的 对水资源的投资。

Investors, venture capitalists:

投资者们，风险投资家们：

a portion of your funds and portfolios should be dedicated to water.

在你们的资金与投资组合中 应该要有一部分用于水资源。

Nothing is more valuable

没有什么比这更有价值的了，

and, after all, businesses are going to need to understand water risks

毕竟，企业也需要去 了解水资源的风险，

in order to remain competitive in the world we are entering.

以在今后所处的世界里 保持竞争力。

Aside from venture capital,

除了风险投资外，

there are also lots of promising government programs

还有许多有前景的政府计划

that encourage economic development through tax incentives.

通过税收优惠鼓励经济发展。

A new option in the US that my company is using

我们公司正在使用一个叫

is called "opportunity zones."

“机会区”的美国新政。

They offer favorable tax treatment for investing capital gains

美国政府对投资在指定的 贫困地区和低收入地区

in designated distressed and low-income areas.

所获的资金收益 提供优惠的税收待遇。

Now, these are areas

要知道，正是这些地区

that are also facing staggering water risk,

面临着巨大的水资源风险，

so this creates crucial incentives to work directly with the communities

因此这类政策对 “直接致力于最需要帮助的社区”

who need help most.

有着关键性的激励作用。

And if you're not looking to make this type of investment

如果你尚未着眼于此类投资

but you own land in the US,

但在美国拥有土地，

did you know that you can leverage your land

你是否知道你能通过‘保育地役权’

to conserve water quality permanently

为你的土地获得

with a conservation easement?

永久性的水质保护？

You can assign the perpetual right to a local land trust

你可以将这项永久性权利 分配给本地土地信托

to conserve your land

从而保护你的土地，

and set specific water quality goals.

并为水质制定特定的目标。

And if you meet those goals,

如果你能达成这些目标，

you can be rewarded with a substantial tax discount every year.

你就能每年获得大幅税收优惠。

How many areas could our global community protect

有多少区域能在 这样与那样的计划下

through these and other programs?

受到我们全球社区的保护？

They're powerful because they offer the access to real property

这些计划之所以有影响力， 是因为它们提供了

necessary to lay the foundation for a global weather service for water.

为“全球水资源气象服务台”奠定基础 所不可或缺的地产的获取方式。

But this can only work if we use these programs as they are intended

但要达成目的，我们必须 遵循这些计划的本意，

and not as mere vehicles for tax evasion.

而非仅仅将其用作为避税工具。

When the conservation easement was established,

在“保育地役权”设立之初，

nobody could anticipate how ingrained in environmental movements

没人能预料到 企业对环境的污染

corporate polluters would become.

会变得如此积重难返。

And we've become accustomed to companies talking about the climate crisis

我们已经习惯了听企业 一边拿气候危机说事，

while doing nothing about it.

一边却对此无所作为。

This has undermined the legacy and the impact of these programs,

这样的状况已经削弱了那些政府 计划的成效与影响，

but it also makes them ripe for reclamation.

但也令各式计划遍地开花。

Why not use conservation easements as they were intended,

为何不贯彻“保育地役权”的本意，

to set and reach ambitious conservation goals?

以设立并实现伟大的环保目标？

Why not create opportunities in opportunity zones?

为何不在"机会区"内创造机会？

Because fundamentally, water security requires accountability.

因为根本问题在于， 需要有人为水质安全负责。

Accountability is not corporate polluters sponsoring environmental groups

负责不是指让污染排放企业 给环境组织

and museums.

和博物馆投钱。

Those are conflicts of interest.

那些是利益冲突。

(Applause)

（掌声）

Accountability is:

负责是指：

making the risk of liability too expensive

让承担责任的风险昂贵之极，

to continue polluting and wasting our water.

从而不敢继续污染和浪费我们的水。

We can't keep settling for words. It's time to act.

我们不能再满足于口头承诺。 是时候付诸行动了。

And where better to start than with our biggest polluters,

既然要行动，就得从我们 最大的污染排放者,

particularly the US Department of Defense, which is taxpayer-funded.

也就是由纳税人供养的 美国国防部开始。

Who and what are we protecting when US soldiers, their families

当美军士兵、士兵的家人、 以及那些生活在

and the people who live near US military bases abroad

海外美国军事基地一带的人 都喝着毒水时，

are all drinking toxic water?

究竟是谁在保护谁？

Global security can no longer remain at odds with protecting our planet

全球安定不再与保护地球

or our collective health.

或是集体健康相冲突。

Our survival depends on it.

人类存亡决定于此。

Similarly,

与之相同，

agriculture in most countries depends on taxpayer-funded subsidies

大多数国家的农业都仰赖 来自纳税人的税款中

that are paid to farmers to secure and stabilize food supplies.

分给农民用来确保食物 供应安全稳定的津贴。

These incentives are a crucial leverage point for us,

这样的激励措施对我们而言 是关键性的发力点，

because agriculture is responsible for consuming 70 percent

因为农业消耗的水资源

of all the water we use every year.

占水资源消耗总量的70%

Fertilizer and pesticide runoff

化肥与农药径流入水

are the two biggest sources of water pollution.

是两项最大的水污染源。

Let's restructure these subsidies to demand better water efficiency

让我们通过调整这类补贴 来要求更高效的用水方式

and less pollution.

和更少的污染。

(Applause)

（掌声）

Finally:

最后：

we can't expect progress

如果利益冲突

if we're unwilling to confront the conflicts of interest

抑制了科学、阻碍了创新、

that suppress science,

还降低了透明度，

that undermine innovation

而我们却不去正视这些冲突，

and that discourage transparency.

我们就不能指望事态会有进展。

It is in the public interest

将我们在水资源方面

to measure and to share everything we can learn and discover

研究与发现到的一切风险 进行测量并分享，

about the risks we face in water.

是符合大众利益的。

Reality does not exist until it's measured.

未经测量的事实是不成立的。

It doesn't just take technology to measure it.

要想测量，不能光靠技术，

It takes our collective will.

还得靠我们的集体意志。

Thank you.

谢谢。

(Applause)

(掌声)