Is there a role for carbon credits in a just transition to net zero? | TED Countdown Dilemma Series

翻译人员: Songzhilin Shi 校对人员: Grace Man

Did you have a position on carbon credits coming into today?

您对今天的碳信用有立场吗？

塔玛拉·托尔斯·奥拉福林 （Tamara Toles O’Laughlin）：

Tamara Toles O'Laughlin: Yeah. No, the position is no.

嗯。不，立场是否定的。

John Kilani: There must be something important in carbon markets,

约翰·基拉尼 （John Kilani）： 碳市场中一定有重要的东西，

otherwise, people would have given up long ago.

否则，人们早就放弃了。

Nat Keohane: So I came in today thinking,

纳特·基奥汉 （Nat Keohane）： 所以我今天来想，

as a tool, carbon markets, carbon credits can be really valuable

作为一种工具， 碳市场，碳信用额，

in creating the kind of economic incentives we need.

在创造我们需要的经济激励方面 真的很有价值。

Julio Friedmann: Today, the carbon markets have no supply,

儒勒·弗里德曼 （Julio Friedmann）： 今天，碳市场没有供应，

no demand, no transparency, no regulation.

没有需求，没有透明度，没有监管。

Other than that, they're perfect.

除此以外，它们是完美的。

Donnel Baird: You buy a carbon offset from a forest

唐纳·贝尔德 （Donnel Baird）： 你通过森林购买了碳补偿额，

but now the forest has burned down

但现在森林被烧毁了，

or they were going to chop the tree down but they didn't, and then they did.

或者他们打算砍树，但他们没有砍， 结果最后又砍了。

Nili Gilbert: We know that we need carbon removals to scale dramatically.

尼利·吉尔伯特 （Nili Gilbert）：

我们知道， 我们需要碳清除量大幅增加。

Al Gore: Different points of view can add to the collective wisdom.

阿尔·戈尔（Al Gore）： 不同观点可以为集体智慧添砖加瓦。

Inés Yábar: We'll work better if we work together.

伊内斯·亚巴尔（Inés Yábar）： 如果共同努力，我们会做得更好。

How do we generate those connections that together move us forward?

我们如何产生这些联系 共同推动我们前进？

James Dyke: The concern that I’ve got about net zero,

詹姆斯·戴克（James Dyke）： 我对净零排放的担忧，

you're probably going to disagree about this,

你可能会不同意这一点，

it might be taking away some of the sense of urgency.

这可能会消除一些紧迫感。

JF: We can be optimistic or we can be pessimistic.

儒勒·弗里德曼： 我们可以乐观，也可以悲观。

But the work looks the same.

但工作看起来是一样的。

Is there anything that struck you about carbon credits

关于碳信用或碳市场，

or carbon markets that you want to talk about?

有什么让你 印象深刻的事情想谈的吗？

AG: Well, I'll wait until the session is over

阿尔·戈尔： 好吧，我会等到会议结束，

to give us some considered opinions on that.

再给一些深思熟虑的意见。

[TED Countdown Dilemma Series]

[TED Countdown 困境系列]

[Is there a role for carbon credits in the transition to a fair,]

[在向公平、净零的未来过渡的 过程中，碳信用是否有作用？]

[net zero future?]

Lindsay Levin: Throughout the world,

林赛·莱文（Lindsay Levin）： 在世界各地，

we find ourselves faced with self-inflicted

我们发现自己面临着自我造成的、

and interconnected problems

相互关联的问题，

that challenge our social fabric,

这些问题挑战着我们的社会结构、

our economic security,

我们的经济安全，

and the very ability of the Earth to sustain us.

以及地球维持我们生存的能力。

We're certainly not short on ideas to address these problems.

我们当然不缺乏 解决这些问题的想法。

But we often get caught up in arguments against one another

但我们经常陷入彼此对立的争论中，

vying for supremacy instead of deciding on a course of action.

争夺霸权，而不是决定行动方案。

So how can we move forward?

那么，我们如何才能向前迈进呢？

It begins by acknowledging the difference between choices and dilemmas.

首先要承认选择和困境之间的区别。

Some decisions come down to choice.

有些决定归结为选择。

You weigh the alternatives, decide and move on.

你权衡各种选择， 做出决定，然后继续前进。

But often, complex situations need both/and thinking instead of either/or.

但通常情况下，复杂的情况 需要同时思考，而不是非此即彼。

They require us to hold competing values together

它们要求我们把 相互竞争的价值观放在一起，

rather than make straightforward choices.

而不是做出直接的选择。

We call these dilemmas.

我们称这些为困境问题。

I'm Lindsay Levin, co-founder of TED Countdown.

我是林赛·莱文， TED Countdown 的联合创始人。

And this is why we launched our Dilemma Series.

这就是我们推出 “困境系列”的原因。

To look at some of the thorniest issues in the climate space

着眼于气候领域的 一些最棘手的问题，

and see how, through deep listening and collaboration,

看看如何通过深入倾听和合作，

we find pathways forward.

找到前进的道路。

In our first Dilemma event,

在我们的第一个“困境”活动中，

we tackled the question

我们讨论了这样一个问题:

Is there a role for carbon credits in accelerating the transition

在过渡到一个公平的、净零的 未来中，碳信用是否有作用？

to a fair net-zero world?

David Biello: First, let's start with some definitions.

大卫·比洛 （David Biello）： 首先，让我们从一些定义开始。

A carbon credit is a tradable permit

碳信用额是一种可交易的许可，

that usually represents one ton of carbon,

通常代表一吨碳，

either not emitted or removed from the atmosphere.

要么不排放， 或从大气中去除。

Carbon offsetting is the practice of buying carbon credits

碳抵消是购买碳信用额

to compensate for carbon emissions generated elsewhere.

以补偿其他地方 产生的碳排放的做法。

Carbon markets are where carbon credits are bought, sold and priced.

碳市场是购买、出售 和定价碳信用额的地方。

Net zero refers to a theoretical state

净零排放是指一种理论状态，

in which overall human-produced carbon emissions are equivalent to zero

其中人类产生的 碳排放总量等同于零，

because any ongoing emissions have been compensated

因为任何持续的排放 都已通过移除进行补偿或抵消。

or offset by removals.

LL: We're going to take you on a journey.

林赛·莱文: 我们将带你踏上一段旅程。

We'll explore why so many people have lost faith in how carbon markets

我们将探讨为什么 如此多的人对碳市场

and net-zero targets operate in practice.

和净零目标的实际运作 失去信心。

We'll hear from people working in frontline communities

我们将听取在一线社区工作的人们

to protect and restore nature and safeguard livelihoods.

对保护和恢复自然 以及保障生计的意见。

And to close, we'll talk about solutions.

最后，我们将讨论解决方案。

We hope this film will speak to those working in sustainability and beyond.

我们希望这部影片能对那些致力于 可持续发展的人有所启发。

Whether you're directly able to influence the supply

无论你是直接能够影响 碳市场的供应方或需求方，

or demand side of carbon markets,

or you're just interested in how we solve the climate crisis,

还是你只是对 我们如何解决气候危机感兴趣，

these issues affect us all.

这些问题都会影响我们所有人。

Let's start by hearing about some of the promises and pitfalls

让我们从 TED 的大卫·比洛

in a conversation between TED's David Biello

和碳市场观察的吉尔斯·杜弗拉森 （Gilles Dufrasne）的对话中开始，

and Gilles Dufrasne of Carbon Market Watch.

听听一些承诺和存在的陷阱。

DB: Now, carbon credits are being used as a big tool

大卫·比洛： 现在，碳信用额正被用作中和

to neutralize otherwise growing emissions.

不断增长的排放量的重要工具。

Are they working?

它们有效吗？

Gilles Dufrasne: So my short answer to this would be that they're not.

吉尔斯·杜弗拉森： 我对此简短的回答是，它们无效。

First, because there is a major concern

首先，人们对这些碳信用额的

around the actual quality of those credits.

实际质量存在担忧。

They're each supposed to represent a full ton of CO2

每一个都应该代表整一吨

that's been reduced or removed and permanently stored.

被减少或移除并 永久储存的二氧化碳。

But in reality,

但在现实中，

many of those credits actually don't represent that full ton of CO2.

其中许多碳信用额实际 无法代表整吨二氧化碳。

In addition to that,

除此之外，

many credits are used in inappropriate ways by companies.

许多碳信用额被公司 以不适当的方式使用。

For example, a company that would make a net-zero claim,

例如，一家公司会提出 净零排放声明，

a carbon neutrality claim for a specific product,

即针对特定产品的碳中和声明，

but with these claims actually only covering 10 or 20 or 50 percent

但这些声明实际上仅涵盖 10% 、 20% 或 50%

of the total emissions of that company or of the good.

该公司或货物的总排放量。 这最终具有误导性。

And this ultimately is misleading.

It's misleading to the public, it's misleading to regulators,

这是对公众的误导， 对监管机构的误导，

it's misleading to business partners.

对商业伙伴的误导。

It gives the impression that these companies,

它给人的印象是，这些公司，

this product doesn't have a net-negative impact on the climate,

这个产品对气候没有净负面影响，

when in reality it certainly does.

但实际上它确实有。

DB: So what does it mean

大卫·比洛： 那么，当一家公司说它

when a company says it has neutralized the emissions

已经中和了其产品或活动的 排放是什么意思呢？

from its products or activities?

GD: Well, in most cases it means

吉尔斯·杜弗拉森： 嗯，在大多数情况下，

the company has purchased a certain number of carbon credits,

这意味着公司已经购买了 一定数量的碳信用额，

but there is a lot of unclarity

但这些碳信用额的实际质量

around the actual quality of those credits,

有很多不明确之处，

what do they represent

它们代表什么

as well as the share of total emissions that's really being covered,

以及实际覆盖的总排放量份额，

that's really being compensated through the purchase of these credits.

实际上是通过 购买这些碳信用额来补偿的。

And this issue of clarity, of transparency.

还有清晰度、透明度的问题。

And so I think that's really something

因此，我认为这确实是 我们现在需要认真解决的问题，

that we need to seriously address right now

in the current context of a booming market

在当前市场蓬勃发展的背景下，

where there is a lot of interest,

有很多兴趣， 和很多投资在数量上增长。

a lot of investment in growing it quantitatively.

If we don't address the quality dimension of it,

如果我们不解决它的质量问题，

we're going to grow a system in which there's not going to be any trust

我们就会发展出 一个没有任何信任的系统

or that trust is progressively going to erode

或者这种信任会逐渐被侵蚀

and ultimately that will destroy the value of the system itself.

最终会摧毁系统本身的价值。

DB: Sounds like something called greenwashing.

大卫·比洛： 听起来像是所谓的漂绿。

Can you give us some particularly egregious examples

你能给我们举一些 特别恶劣的例子吗？

of that kind of activity?

GD: Yeah, I think, you know,

吉尔斯·杜弗拉森： 好的，我认为你知道

carbon-neutral fossil fuels is an obvious one ...

碳中和化石燃料 是一个显而易见的…

(Laughter and applause)

（笑声和掌声）

... that many of you will certainly have had heard of.

…你们中的许多人肯定听说过。

I mean, to me, it's just an oxymoron,

对我来说，这只是个矛盾修辞法，

it makes no sense.

完全说不通。

It is flawed conceptually and practically.

它在概念上和实践上都是有缺陷的。

At a conceptual level,

在概念层面上，

it gives the impression that we can continue to burn fossil fuels

它给人的印象是， 我们可以以延续了几十年的方式

in the way we’ve been doing it for decades --

继续燃烧化石燃料。

exactly what has landed us in the crisis we are in today --

这正是让我们陷入 今天的危机的原因——

and that somehow, magically we can do this

不知何故，神奇的是，

without having a net impact on climate.

我们可以在不对气候 造成净影响的情况下做到这一点。

And that is fundamentally misleading, and it’s damaging.

这从根本上是误导性的， 而且是有害的。

It is harmful to our collective willingness

这对我们采取行为改变 和昂贵投资的集体意愿是有害的，

to adopt the behavioral changes and the costly investments

that we need to adopt

我们需要采取这些措施，

in order to transition to a safer planet.

以过渡到一个更安全的地球。

LL: While we can agree

林赛·莱文： 虽然我们同意

that cutting greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible is our ultimate goal,

尽快减少温室气体排放是 我们的最终目标，

the idea of net zero has inspired some pretty vigorous debate.

但净零碳的想法 已经引发了一些相当激烈的辩论。

Here's Professor James Dyke

下面是来自埃克塞特大学 （University of Exeter）的

of the University of Exeter with his concerns.

詹姆斯·戴克教授 提出的他的担忧。

JD: Within just a few years,

詹姆斯·戴克： 在短短几年内，

net zero has become the anchor concept

净零排放已成为全球 避免灾难计划的核心概念。

for the world's plans to avoid disaster.

It sounds simple enough.

这听起来很简单。

Its central premise is that the risks of climate change

它的核心前提是， 气候变化的风险

is that there is too much carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere.

在于地球大气中二氧化碳过多。

So it follows, we must stop emitting more

因此，我们必须 停止排放更多的气体，

and even remove some of it.

甚至清除一部分。

Hopefully by the middle of this century,

希望到本世纪中叶，

any residual emissions will be balanced by technologies

任何残留的排放都能被 从大气中去除碳的技术所平衡。

that remove carbon from the atmosphere.

But by introducing carbon removals into climate policies,

但是，通过将碳移除引入气候政策，

we have set a trap

我们设置了一个陷阱，

because it is incredibly seductive to rely on carbon removals in the future

因为依靠未来的碳移除， 听起来具有难以置信的诱惑力，

instead of rapid decarbonization now.

所以不再着眼于当下的快速脱碳。

It gives the impression we are acting,

它给人的印象是我们正在采取行动，

so businesses don't need to change their models

因此企业不需要改变他们的模式，

and governments don't need to propose bold action.

政府也不需要提出大胆的行动。

What this means is that it is now almost inevitable

这意味着， 我们现在几乎不可避免地将进入一个

that we will be entering a warmer and more dangerous world.

更温暖、更危险的世界。

How did this happen?

这是怎么发生的？

How did the idea of net zero become so compromised, so corrupted?

净零碳的概念是如何变得如此妥协、 如此腐败的？

A key moment for the development of net zero was the 2015 Paris Agreement.

净零排放发展的关键时刻是 2015 年的《巴黎协定》。

The overall objective of this landmark climate treaty

这项具有里程碑意义的 气候条约的总体目标是，

was that global warming should be limited to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius

全球变暖应控制在 不超过 1.5 摄氏度的范围内，

to reduce the risks of devastating impacts.

以减少灾难性影响的风险。

Many scientists, including myself,

许多科学家，包括我自己，

were very skeptical that this was possible,

都非常怀疑这是否可能，

given the absence of radical proposals.

因为没有激进的建议。

But there was also a deep sense of responsibility

但也有一种强烈的责任感，

to try to make the Paris Agreement work.

试图让《巴黎协定》发挥作用。

They soon discovered

他们很快发现，

it was impossible to get their models to decarbonize as fast as 1.5 required

不可能让他们的模型以 1.5 摄氏度的 要求的速度脱碳的同时，

if one assumed continuous economic growth.

还可以使经济有持续增长。

The only way to make the models work was by introducing carbon removal.

让这些模型起作用的唯一方法 是引入碳去除。

More recently, attention has turned to DAC: direct air capture.

最近，人们的注意力转向了 DAC：直接空气捕获。

This would strip out carbon dioxide molecules directly from the air

这将直接从空气中 剥离二氧化碳分子，

and then pump them to underground storage sites.

然后将它们泵送到地下储存地点。

The technology is interesting,

这项技术很有趣，

but attempts to scale up DAC face two fundamental challenges.

但试图扩大 DAC 的规模 面临着两个基本挑战。

First, the process is extremely energy intensive,

首先，该过程非常耗能，

requiring significant amounts of electricity

需要大量的电力，

and sometimes natural gas to run.

有时还需要天然气才能运行。

Second, safely storing carbon dioxide is not a trivial enterprise.

其次，安全储存二氧化碳并非易事。

It's likely to be the case that every carbon storage site

很可能每个碳储存地点

will need to be carefully tailored to the specific geological circumstances

都需要根据注入地点的 特定地质环境进行仔细定制。

at the injection sites.

Now such concerns with carbon removal are sometimes brushed away

现在，这种对碳去除的担忧有时会被

with the sheer enthusiasm that surrounds these technologies.

围绕这些技术的纯粹热情所掩盖。

The assumption appears to be that large-scale carbon removal will work

假设似乎是大规模的碳去除将会奏效，

because it has to work.

因为它必须奏效。

Even if we assume these technologies do emerge at scale,

即使我们假设这些技术 确实大规模出现，

it's likely they will be very expensive to run.

它们的运行成本也可能非常昂贵。

Some studies estimate many trillions of US dollars

一些研究估计，数万亿美元的投资

to no evident economic benefit,

没有明显的经济效益，

since it's about clearing up carbon pollution and hiding it underground.

因为这是为了清除碳污染 并将其隐藏在地下。

The time has come for us to voice our fears about net zero policies,

现在是我们表达 对净零政策担忧的时候了，

and that begins by leveling with the public

我们首先要向公众 公开《巴黎协定》的内容。

about the Paris Agreement.

At the moment, we are desperately trying to manage the narrative

目前，我们正竭力 控制叙事和调整模式，

and adjusting models

in order to avoid acknowledging that the Paris Agreement is failing.

以避免承认《巴黎协定》正在失败。

A 2021 survey conducted by the science journal Nature

科学杂志《自然》在 2021 年 进行的一项调查发现，

found that a majority of IPCC climate scientists who responded

大多数接受调查的 IPCC 气候科学家认为

thought we were heading towards a catastrophic

我们正走向 灾难性的 3 摄氏度升温。

three degrees Celsius of warming.

Only four percent thought limiting to 1.5 was likely.

只有 4% 的人认为 限制在 1.5 摄氏度的水平是可能的。

We can avoid climate catastrophe, but I fear we won't

我们可以避免气候灾难， 但我担心，

if we don't confront our wishful thinking around net zero.

如果我们不正视我们对净零的 一厢情愿的想法，我们就无法避免。

DB: As you can see,

唐纳·贝尔德： 就像你们看到的，

carbon markets are not uniformly delivering what they promise,

碳市场并没有统一兑现他们的承诺，

and many believe they may actually be making things worse.

许多人认为它们实际上 可能正在使事情变得更糟。

However, they are potentially a mechanism to provide investment

然而，它们可能是一种为重要的 自然解决方案提供投资的机制，

in vital natural solutions

and if done differently,

如果采取不同的做法，

could bring significant money to people and places that need it.

可能会为需要资金的人和地方 带来大量资金。

Here is Kavita Prakash-Mani of Mandai Nature

这里是曼达伊自然公司的

卡维塔·普拉卡什-马尼 (Kavita Prakash-Mani)，

to talk about ways to ensure that local communities

他谈到了如何确保当地社区

benefit from this growing industry.

从这个不断增长的行业中受益。

Kavita Prakash-Mani: Let me start by saying that a ton of carbon

卡维塔·普拉卡什-马尼 ： 首先要说的是，

一吨碳不仅仅是一吨碳。 它在其中体现了自然保护、

is not just a ton of carbon.

It embodies in it natural protection,

community interests and benefits,

社区兴趣和利益，

as well as helping save us from disastrous climate change.

以及帮助我们 免受灾难性气候变化的影响。

We have a lot of nature-based conservation organizations protecting

我们有很多以自然为基础的保护组织

and restoring our ecosystems,

来保护和恢复我们的生态系统，

and they are all wondering

他们都想知道 如何成为这个碳市场的一部分。

how they can be part of this carbon market.

Their ability to monetize carbon that they sequester

他们将其封存的碳货币化的能力

will be crucial for their long-term survival

对他们长期生存和 产生我们都渴望的影响至关重要。

and the impact that we all want.

After all, nature and climate are two sides of the same coin.

毕竟，自然和气候是 一枚硬币的两面。

However, to get to those opportunities,

然而，为了获得这些机会，

we need to address some really systemic challenges.

我们需要解决 一些真正系统性的挑战。

Take, for example, the technical aspects that we have on any carbon credit:

以碳信用额技术方面为例：

additionality, permanence, no leakage, baselining,

附加性、持久性、无泄漏、基线化，

all very difficult concepts for these small organizations.

对于这些小型组织来说 都是非常困难的概念。

Add to that measurement and verification.

再加上测量和验证。

How do we get pre-feasibility studies,

我们如何获得预可行性研究、

feasibility studies, project development?

可行性研究和项目开发？

How do these small organizations take on these high costs

这些小组织在碳价非常低时，

该如何承担这些高额的费用 来提供这些文件呢？

when the price of carbon is very low to deliver these documentation?

But that's not the problem with the larger players.

但这并不是大型企业的问题所在。

And there's a systemic imbalance of power.

而且存在着系统性的权力不平衡。

Larger NGOs, companies, project developers

较大的非政府组织、 公司、项目开发商

all have access to international markets and institutional finance.

都可以进入国际市场和机构融资。

The smaller organizations see the opportunity

较小的组织看到了机会，

but just do not have the means to tap into it.

但就是没有办法利用它。

We should also look one level higher, at governments.

我们还应该把目光投向政府。

Take, for instance, Indonesia,

以印度尼西亚为例，

a country with the highest potential

一个利用基于自然解决方案 减少碳排放潜力最大的国家。

of carbon mitigation from nature-based solutions.

It's the third-largest tropical forest.

它是第三大热带森林。

It has a coastline with mangroves,

它的海岸线上有红树林，

and it has 15 to 30 million hectares of peatland.

还有 1500 万到 3000万 公顷的泥炭地。

But the government has restricted any new projects from being developed

但政府限制了任何新项目的开发

or carbon credits from being sold to the international market.

或碳信用额向国际市场的销售。

This has merit because, after all,

这有其道理，因为毕竟

developing countries also need to meet their nationally determined contributions,

发展中国家也需要履行 其国家决定的贡献，

and they do not have to sell cheap credits to developed countries

它们不必向已经破坏了 部分环境的发达国家

that have already destroyed part of their environment

或没有脱碳的公司 出售廉价的碳信用额。

or companies that are not decarbonizing.

However, it does restrict international finance from going into conservation

然而，它确实限制了 国际资金进入保护

and into communities.

和进入社区。

Some countries are trying to get the market to work.

一些国家正试图让市场运转起来。

In Asia, that's Vietnam and Cambodia.

在亚洲，在越南和柬埔寨。

But we still do not have the right market mechanisms to ensure that it's equitable,

但我们仍然没有正确的市场机制 来确保它的公平性、

safe and the impact that we want.

安全性和我们想要的影响。

DB: As Kavita said, a ton of carbon is not just a ton of carbon.

大卫·比洛：正如卡维塔所说， 一吨碳不仅仅是一吨碳。

To build on that,

在此基础上，

here's Susan Chomba of the World Resources Institute Africa,

来自非洲世界资源研究所的 苏珊·琼巴（Susan Chomba）

to talk in more detail about all the things we miss

将更详细地讨论

when we think too narrowly about carbon benefits

当我们过于狭隘地 考虑碳效益而忽略其他时，

and nothing else.

我们错过的所有东西。

Susan Chomba: So I'm going to talk to you

苏珊·琼巴： 所以我要和你们谈谈

about all the elements about carbon markets

碳市场中所有与碳无关的因素。

that have got nothing to do with carbon.

Our forests, peatlands and oceans are more than the carbon that they store.

我们的森林、泥炭地和海洋 不仅仅代表它们所能储存的碳。

They're the foundation of livelihoods of billions of people

它们是数十亿人口

who depend on them directly and indirectly.

直接或间接依赖的生计的基础。

They provide the hydrological functions that ensure we have rivers, we have lakes

它们提供水文功能， 确保我们有河流和湖泊，

and that we can grow food successfully.

确保我们能成功种植粮食。

They are home to biodiversity.

They are also home to indigenous people

他们也是土著人的家园，

who protect them with their blood, sweat and tears.

他们用鲜血、汗水和 泪水保护着这里。

So when we lose these ecosystems,

因此，当我们失去这些生态系统时，

the livelihoods of local communities

当地社区和土著人民的生计

and Indigenous people are adversely affected.

就会受到不利影响。

When you look at the way we designed the carbon markets,

当你观察我们设计碳市场的方式时，

we designed them with various assumptions.

你会发现我们在设计的时候有 各种各样的假设。

First of all,

首先，

carbon markets perpetuate the notion

碳市场延续了这样一种观念，

that our forests and peatlands are all about carbon.

即我们的森林和泥炭地都与碳有关。

They overlook the ecosystem services that these ecosystems provide,

他们忽视了这些生态系统 提供的生态系统服务，

such as clean water, healthy and nutritious food,

如清洁水、健康营养食品、

biodiversity and its related services

生物多样性及其相关服务，

such as pollination, pest control

如授粉、害虫防治

and even nitrogen fixation.

甚至固氮作用。

Companies are prepared to pay for carbon

企业愿意为碳排放买单，

because it helps them to tick either their compliance box

因为这有助于它们在合规方面

or the public relation boxes.

或公关方面做出选择。

But rarely do we couple that

但我们很少把它与 这些自然生态系统提供的

with the other ecosystem services

that these natural ecosystems are providing.

其他生态系统服务结合起来。

Carbon markets perpetuate the notion

碳市场延续了这样一种观念，

that we can continue with our fossil fuel-driven lifestyles

即我们可以继续 我们以化石燃料为驱动的生活方式，

and offset our externalities, and perhaps even our guilt,

并抵消我们的外部性，

甚至可能是我们对位于 南半球的贫穷当地社区的内疚。

on the poor local communities that are located in the Global South.

In fact, nowadays,

事实上，如今，

if a lot of projects provide a lot of ecosystem services

如果许多项目 提供了大量的生态系统服务，

but are not solid on the carbon side,

但在碳方面并不扎实，

they are often dismissed as poorly designed or poorly governed.

它们通常会被视为 设计不善或管理不善。

Carbon markets are based on complicated

碳市场基于复杂

and costly reporting and verification systems.

且昂贵的报告和验证系统。

And these end up taking up most of the revenue

而这些最终占用了 当时来自碳的大部分收入。

that is then coming from carbon.

And local communities get the leftovers if they are lucky.

而当地社区如果幸运的话， 会得到剩余的东西。

The value and the price of carbon,

碳的价值和价格

compared to alternative land uses such as mining,

与采矿、化石燃料开采等 其他土地用途相比，

fossil fuel extraction,

has been far too low for far too long.

长期以来都太低了。

And so what we are witnessing

因此，我们看到的是，

is governments in the Global South continue to issue permits for mining,

南半球政府仍在继续向采矿、

for oil exploration,

石油开采，

in some of the most critical ecosystems: peatlands, forests.

和一些最关键的生态系统中， 如：泥炭地、森林，继续发放许可证。

I work a lot in the Congo Basin.

我经常在刚果盆地工作。

I see it every day.

我每天都能看到。

LL: So we've heard what isn't working

林赛·莱文： 我们已经知道了什么是行不通的，

and what existing carbon markets often miss on the ground.

而现有的碳市场往往忽略了这一点。

Now let's dive into different ways of thinking

现在，让我们深入研究 可以重塑系统的不同思维方式

that could reshape the system

and actually generate the positive outcomes we want.

并实际产生我们想要的积极结果。

Here's Gabrielle Walker of Rethinking Removals.

这是来自反思移除的 加布里埃尔·沃克（Gabrielle Walker）。

Gabrielle Walker: I think the carbon market is immensely powerful

加布里埃尔·沃克： 我认为碳市场非常强大

and immensely valuable,

且非常有价值，

and I do think we can use it as a powerful tool

我确实认为我们可以把它作为帮助

for helping to solve the climate crisis.

解决气候危机的有力工具。

But I've also started to think

但我也开始觉得我们一直

that we've been thinking about it the wrong way.

在用错误的方式思考这个问题。

There are three really big and important climate outcomes

有三个真正大的和重要的气候结果，

that the carbon market could help with.

是碳市场可以帮助实现的。

So there’s reducing fossil emissions as fast as possible;

因此，有尽可能快地减少 化石燃料的排放；

there’s protecting natural carbon sinks;

保护自然碳汇；

and there's removing CO2 from the atmosphere.

还有从大气中去除二氧化碳。

Reduction, protection and removal.

减少、保护和移除。

And I found that in lots of people's minds,

我发现在很多人的脑海中，

those three get kind of smooshed together in one generic kind of, offset,

这三样东西被混杂在一起， 成为一种通用的、抵消性的东西。

but it's worth separating them out

但值得将它们分开，

because those outcomes need different kinds of incentives.

因为这些结果需要 不同类型的激励措施。

I'll show you what I mean.

我来告诉你我的意思。

If you start with the first one,

如果你从第一个开始，

reducing fossil emissions as fast as possible.

尽快减少化石排放。

That's reduction credits.

这就是减分。

Now, one problem with those

现在，它们的一个问题是 它们实际上并不能中和排放。

is that they don't actually neutralize emissions.

So if I put a ton of CO2 in the air,

所以如果我排放 一吨二氧化碳到空气中，

and I pay you not to put your ton of CO2 in the air,

我付钱让你不排放 你那一吨的二氧化碳到空气中，

my ton is still there.

我那一吨仍然在那里。

It doesn't get you to zero, it doesn't neutralize.

它不会让你变成零， 也不会中和。

And this is the realm of quite a lot of traditional offsets.

而这是相当多的传统抵消的范畴。

Another issue with them, is they tend to be very cheap,

它们的另一个问题是 它们往往非常便宜，

less than 20 dollars a ton.

不到 20 美元一吨。

So it can get immensely tempting just to buy loads of credits

因此，仅仅购买大量的信用额度，

and not do the hard work of reducing your own emissions.

而不去做减少自己排放的艰苦工作， 可能会变得非常诱人。

And that is not where we should be putting the money.

这不是我们应该投资的地方。

But where reduction credits can help us

但是，减少信用额度可以帮助我们

is in creating clean infrastructure

在一些地方建立清洁的基础设施，

in places where it wouldn't have happened otherwise.

否则这些设施就不会发生。

So if you think about it that way,

所以如果你这么想，

that's the outcome you're trying to get to,

这就是你想要达到的结果，

then the incentives to build around reduction credits,

那么围绕减排信用额度建设的激励，

the highest-rated reduction credits,

最高评级的减排信额，

will be the ones that drive money towards building clean infrastructure

将会推动资金 流向南半球的清洁基础设施建设。

in the Global South.

And the cheapest coal-fired power plant to shut down

而关闭的最便宜的燃煤电厂

will be the one in the Global South that was never built in the first place.

将会是南半球 从一开始就没有建造的电厂。

OK, so that's the first one.

好，这是第一个。

Second one, protecting natural carbon sinks.

第二，保护自然碳汇。

Now, these already exist in the carbon market,

现在，这些已经存在于碳市场中，

like the reduction credits.

比如减排信用额度。

And like reduction credits, they don't neutralize emissions.

和减排信用额度一样， 它们不能抵消排放。

I put a ton of CO2 in the air,

我向空气中排放一吨二氧化碳，

you stop a ton coming out from a sink,

你阻止一吨二氧化碳 从碳汇排放出来，

my ton's still in the air.

我的一吨还在空气中。

They also tend to get smooshed together.

它们还往往被挤在一起。

There isn’t a separate category called protection credits -- yet.

目前还没有一个单独的类别 叫做保护信额。

And I think it's worth separating them out

我认为有必要把它们分开，

because it's hugely important to drive money

因为把钱花在保护

towards protecting those sinks,

这些水池、雨林和泥炭地上是 非常重要的。

rain forests, peatlands.

So then what incentives do you build around?

那么，你是围绕着 什么激励措施来建立的呢？

What are the highest-rated protection credits?

什么是最高等级的保护信额？

They'd be the ones maybe with the biggest carbon stores,

他们可能是拥有最大碳储存的人，

maybe the ones that are most vulnerable,

也许是最脆弱的，

maybe the ones that protect the most biodiversity,

也许是那些保护 最多生物多样性的人，

maybe the ones that drive the money towards the communities

也许是那些将钱推向社区的人，

that are actually there husbanding and protecting those stores.

那些实际在管理和 保护这些碳储存的人。

OK, third category, we’ve heard a lot about this,

第三类，我们已经听过很多次了，

third category: removal credits.

第三类：移除信额。

That's taking a ton of CO2 out of the atmosphere and keeping it out.

这将从大气中吸收大量的二氧化碳， 并将其排除在外。

So unlike the other two categories of credit,

因此，与其他两类信用不同的是，

removals credits really do neutralize emissions.

移除信额确实能中和排放。

If I put a ton of CO2 in the air,

如果我在空气中排放一吨二氧化碳，

I pay you to remove a ton,

我付钱让你去除一吨，

you get to zero

你会得到零，

because what goes up does come down.

因为上升的二氧化碳会下降。

Those are the only category of credits that can be used to claim net zero.

这些是唯一一类 可以用来达到净零的信额。

None of the others can do it.

其他都无法做到。

They do already exist in the carbon market,

它们确实已经存在于碳市场中，

really tiny percentage of the total.

占总量的比例很小。

And we're going to need an awful lot more of them.

而我们将会需要极多这样的信额。

So at the moment,

因此，目前，

every year we're removing durably maybe 100,000 tons of CO2.

每年我们都会持久地 消除大约 10 万吨的二氧化碳。

And according to the IPCC,

而根据 IPCC 的说法，

carbon removals are now unavoidable to get to net zero by 2050.

为了在 2050 年达到净零， 碳移除是不可避免的。

And by 2050,

到 2050 年，

we're going to have to be removing billions of tons.

我们将不得不清除数十亿吨。

So to get from a 100,000 tons to billions of tons,

因此，要从 10万 吨到数十亿吨，

we're going to have to start really small in this almost nonexistent industry

我们必须从这个几乎不存在的行业中 非常小的规模开始，

and scale it up to the gigaton scale, affordably,

然后在经济上将其扩大到 数十亿吨的规模，

without causing other undesirable side effects

同时不造成其他不良的副作用，

and making sure that these removals are real.

并确保这些移除是真实的。

And we've got to get the cost down very quickly

我们必须尽快降低成本，

the way that we did for solar and wind.

就像我们在太阳能和 风能上做的那样。

So that's the objective,

这就是目标，

that's the outcome that we're trying to achieve.

这就是我们正在努力实现的结果。

DB: So that's a way to reorganize our overall thinking

大卫·比洛：这是一种重新组织我们 对碳信用额度的整体思考的方法。

around carbon credits.

But how should companies reshape their thinking?

但企业应该如何重塑思维呢？

Here is Derik Broekhoff of the Stockholm Environment Institute.

这是斯德哥尔摩环境研究所的 德里克·布罗克霍夫（Derik Broekhoff ）。

Derik Broekhoff: Net zero has become the dominant paradigm

德里克·布罗克霍夫：净零碳已成为 实现气候目标的主导范式。

for climate ambition.

Many countries have announced net-zero targets,

许多国家已经宣布了净零目标，

and so many companies are doing the same.

许多公司也在这样做。

Today, I want to challenge the idea

今天，我想挑战这样的观点：

that companies should emphasize achieving net zero for themselves

公司应该强调为自己实现净零，

rather than focus on how best to contribute to global net zero.

而不是专注于 如何为全球净零做出最佳贡献。

I like the way Carbone 4 frames it:

我喜欢 Carbone 4 的框架方式：

"'A company is not carbon neutral.

“一家公司不是碳中和的，

It contributes to neutrality."

它为碳中和做出了贡献。”

Let me explain why I believe it's essential to make this distinction.

让我解释一下为什么 我认为必须做出这种区分。

Current net-zero frameworks presume that companies should imitate,

目前的净零排放框架假定公司应该在

at a corporate level, what must happen globally.

公司层面上 模仿全球必须发生的事情。

That is, reduce their own emissions as far as possible

也就是说，尽可能减少自己的排放，

and balance out the emissions that remain with carbon dioxide removals.

并通过二氧化碳去除 来平衡剩余的排放。

Yet this notion is already leading to a perverse effect

然而，这种观念已经对企业如何使用 减排资金产生了不良影响。

on how companies spend their mitigation dollars.

According to at least one study,

至少有一项研究表明，

just a handful of companies have already pledged more removals

只有少数几家公司 已经承诺减少的碳量

than the entire world could provide.

超过整个世界所能提供的。

At a global level,

在全球范围内，

removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere

从大气中去除二氧化碳

will be essential for limiting global warming.

对于限制全球变暖至关重要。

As the IPCC, for example, has made abundantly clear.

例如，IPCC 已经 非常清楚地表明了这一点。

But having corporate actors purchase removals in bulk

但是，让企业主体 大量购买移除设备，

to achieve their own mini versions of net zero

以实现他们自己的迷你版净零排放，

misses the forest for the trees.

是只见树不见林。

The world desperately needs to reduce emissions.

世界迫切需要减少排放。

To move the world towards net zero,

为了推动世界实现净零排放，

companies would do better in the near term to both reduce their own emissions

企业在短期内会做得更好， 既要减少自己的排放，

and help others do the same.

又要帮助其他人也这样做。

First, focus on the big picture.

首先，着眼大局。

The idea of achieving net zero at a corporate level is self-centered.

在企业层面实现净零的想法是 以自我为中心的。

We need to change the narrative from:

我们需要改变这种说法，

“We’re no longer part of the problem if we’ve neutralized our emissions,”

从 “如果我们已经中和了我们的 排放，我们就不再是问题的一部分，”

to “We are part of a global solution to climate change.”

到 “我们是全球气候 变化解决方案的一部分“。

This means not just imitating what needs to happen globally,

这意味着不只是 模仿全球需要发生的事情，

but instead taking actions that beneficially advance

而是采取有益于 推进全球净零排放结果的行动，

a global net-zero outcome,

including by prioritizing emission reductions over removals

包括在短期内 将减排量置于清除量之上。

in the near term.

Second, put equity front and center.

第二，把公平放在首位和中心位置。

From a scientific perspective,

从科学的角度来看，

there's no reason why the correct level of emissions

没有理由说任何特定行为者的 正确排放水平应该是净零。

for any given actor should be net zero.

What is fair and feasible could be net positive,

公平和可行的可能是净正排放、

zero or negative emissions.

零排放或负排放。

Companies should focus on making equitable contributions to global goals,

企业应注重 为全球目标做出公平的贡献，

including through near-term support for emission reductions

包括通过对其价值链之外的 减排提供近期的支持。

outside their value chains.

Third, connect with larger policy efforts.

第三，与更大范围的政策对接。

No company acting on its own can solve the climate crisis.

没有一家公司 可以单独解决气候危机。

We urgently need to focus attention on collective action.

我们迫切需要 把注意力集中在集体行动上。

Companies that are truly committed to net zero

真正致力于实现净零排放的公司

need to support climate policies at all levels of government

需要支持各级政府和 国际上的气候政策，

and internationally

that advance an equitable, comprehensive and coordinated global transition.

以推进公平、 全面和协调的全球转型。

LL: We know many people think carbon credits

林赛·莱文： 我们知道，许多人认为碳信用额

and the idea of net zero are deeply flawed.

和净零的想法存在严重缺陷。

But do they have to be?

但是他们必须如此吗？

In our next talk,

在我们的下一次演讲中，

Annette Nazareth of the Integrity Council for Voluntary Carbon Markets

自愿碳市场诚信委员会的 安妮特·拿撒勒（Annette Nazareth）

lays out a set of required core principles

提出了一套必要的核心原则，

to build a market that delivers robust, quantifiable

以建立一个提供强劲、可量化

and climate-positive outcomes.

和气候积极成果的市场。

Annette Nazareth: Our starting point for the voluntary carbon market

安妮特·拿撒勒： 我们建立自愿碳市场的出发点是，

is that it exists to accelerate a just transition to 1.5 degrees.

它的存在是为了加速 向 1.5 度的公正过渡。

It is an important complementary tool to mobilize billions of dollars

它是动员数十亿美元的 重要补充工具

that wouldn't otherwise be available

否则就不能用于 气候缓解并促使它的发生。

into climate mitigation that wouldn't otherwise happen.

But it will only deliver on that promise

但它只有在高度诚信的基础上 才能兑现这一承诺。

if it is rooted in high integrity.

An important thing to know about the voluntary carbon markets

关于自愿碳市场， 需要了解的一件重要事情是，

is that it is, as its name suggests, voluntary.

顾名思义，它是自愿的。

It's driven by private sector actors,

它由私营部门参与者推动，

and it's not regulated by governments or by financial authorities.

不受政府或金融当局的监管。

But unregulated cannot mean chaotic or opaque.

但不受监管并不意味着 混乱或不透明。

I spent much of my career as a markets regulator,

我职业生涯的大部分时间 都在做市场监管者，

and I know markets.

我了解市场。

And I know that there are some who think

我知道有些人认为市场 总是在寻找一些新产品来兜售。

that markets are always looking for some new product to hawk.

And today, that product is carbon.

而今天，这种产品就是碳。

That's why in designing an effective market,

这就是为什么 在设计一个有效的市场时，

we have to start with integrity.

我们必须从诚信开始。

These core carbon principles, which we call CCPs,

这些核心碳原则， 我们称之为 CCP，

will address the most critical elements of credit quality.

将解决信用质量的最关键因素。

They include additionality,

它们包括额外性、

permanence, robust quantification,

持久性、稳健的量化、

validation and verification,

验证和核实、

no double-counting,

不重复计算、

transition to net zero emissions

向净零排放过渡

and sustainable development impacts and safeguards.

以及可持续发展影响和保障措施。

So let me unpack those a bit.

因此，让我稍微解读一下这些。

Additionality.

额外性。

Additionality means that the emission reduction or emission

额外性意味着 如果没有碳信用额的收入，

wouldn't have happened without the revenue from carbon credits.

减排或排放就不会发生。

Permanence means that those reductions and removals will stand the test of time.

永久性意味着这些削减和移除 将经得起时间的考验。

And if they don't, they will be fully compensated.

如果他们不这样做， 他们将得到充分的补偿。

An example of that would be a forestry project

例如一个林业的项目，

that issues carbon credits that is then destroyed in a wildfire.

在它发放碳额后，在野火中被摧毁。

Robust quantification means that the impact of the credits

稳健量化意味着 信额的影响被精确地测量，

is accurately measured and accounted for conservatively

并在坚实科学的基础上保守地计算。

based on solid science.

Validation and verification means

验证和核实意味着

that the numbers are genuine and meaningful

这些数字是真实和有意义的，

and are validated and verified by an accredited body

并由一个有诚信的机构 进行验证和核实，

that has the integrity to do that job robustly.

以便有力地完成这项工作。

No double-counting means

没有重复计算意味着

that a carbon credit is registered and issued only once,

碳信用额只登记和发放一次，

and the emissions reductions and removals that that credit generates

该信用额产生的减排量和清除量

will only be claimed by one party.

只能由一方申请。

Meanwhile,

同时，

our colleagues at the Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative, the VCMI,

我们在自愿碳市场诚信倡议 (VCMI) 的 同事们正在研究类似的标准，

are working on similar standards that will address credible claims

以解决可信的索赔要求，

so that we can come to a common understanding

以便我们能够达成共识，

that carbon credits will only count

碳信用额度只有在被用作合法的

if they are used as a complementary tool within a legitimate net-zero pathway.

净零排放途径的补充工具时才算数。

If we have integrity

如果我们在信额的供应、

in the supply of credits,

how they are traded and how they are used,

交易和使用方面保持诚信，

then a powerful price signal will emerge.

那么一个强有力的价格信号就会出现。

LL: The Dilemma Series was born out of a strong conviction

林赛·莱文：《困境系列》的诞生 源于这样一个坚定的信念：

that when reasonable people disagree,

当理性的人产生分歧时，

the way out is not to dismiss one side over another,

解决问题的方法不是摒弃一方，

but in fact to hold and value different points of view

而是事实上坚持和重视不同的观点，

and see what we can generate together.

看看我们能共同产生什么。

In dilemma thinking, this is called the resolution zone,

在困境思维中，这被称为解决区域，

and reaching it is vital if we are going to make real progress on climate.

如果我们要在气候问题上取得真正的 进展，达到这个区域是至关重要的。

Let's hear again from some leading voices who we invited to share ideas,

让我们再次听到我们邀请的一些主要声音， 他们分享想法，

ask questions and engage in productive debate.

提出问题，并进行富有成效的辩论。

NG: In my inbox, every day, are the debates in the climate community

尼利·吉尔伯特： 每天在我的收件箱里，都是气候学界

about how exactly we're going to get this done.

关于我们到底该 如何实现这一目标的辩论。

And the debates are important

辩论很重要，

because this is the hardest problem that we've ever faced.

因为这是我们曾经面临的 最困难的问题。

And so we have to have open ears,

因此，我们必须敞开心扉，

even more open perhaps to our critics than to the ones who agree with us

甚至对我们的批评者比 对那些同意我们的人更开放，

because we have so much to figure out at

因为我们有很多事情要弄清楚。

TTO: I had a good conversation about how,

塔玛拉·托尔斯·奥拉福林： 我有一个很好的对话，

as much as I would like to pretend we're going to get there on climate

我很想假装我们将 在气候问题上取得进展，

because of trust and relationships,

因为信任和关系，

we've wasted all the time for that

我们浪费了所有的时间，

so we really need to get there by alignment.

所以我们真的需要 通过结盟来达成目标。

If we can agree to a few things

如果我们能达成几点共识，

that lead to not dying on a fiery gas ball,

让我们不至于死在燃烧的煤气球上，

I will build my relationships on the way to that.

我会在这个过程中 建立我的人际关系。

NK: We heard in the first sessions about how to make sure

纳特·基奥汉： 在第一届会议上，

that the carbon market is working for people on the ground

我们听到了如何确保 碳市场为基层民众和基层社区服务，

and communities on the ground

who didn't do anything to contribute to climate change

而那些对气候变化没有任何贡献的人

are going to be often the most vulnerable to bearing the brunt of its impacts.

往往最容易受到气候变化的冲击。

They're not thinking about the carbon market,

他们没有考虑碳市场，

we heard that from Susan Chomba from her work in Burundi,

我们从苏珊·琼巴在布隆迪的工作中 听到了这一点，

and from Kavita Prakash-Mani from her work with smallholders in Southeast Asia.

从卡维塔·普拉卡什-马尼那里听到了 她在东南亚小农的工作。

JF: The thing that shifted my thinking the most

儒勒·弗里德曼： 最让我转变想法的是，

was the way that Annette Nazareth talked about what is necessary to create

安妮特·拿撒勒谈到 创建一个综合的、

in an integrated and high-integrity carbon market.

高完整性的碳市场的 必要条件的方式。

That level of clarity I found actually shifted my mind

我发现的这种清晰度 实际上改变了我的想法，

in terms of structuring a market in a valuable way.

以一种有价值的方式构建市场。

DB: There were a lot of kind of, overlapping ideas

大卫·比洛： 有很多重叠的想法，

on how to get to solutions from people who don't really agree on everything.

关于如何从那些意见 并不完全一致的人那里得到解决方案。

JD: All carbon removal proposals need to be based on robust science,

詹姆斯·戴克：所有碳去除提案 都需要基于强大的科学、

engineering and economics.

工程和经济。

Once we have a credible total amount of carbon

一旦我们有了可靠的碳总量，

that can be removed by proposed technology

可以通过拟议的技术

that includes its capture and safe storage,

包括其捕获和安全储存，

then and only then can it be included in net-zero policies and models.

那么也只有这样， 它才能被纳入净零政策和模型。

GW: So to get from 100,000 tons to billions of tons,

加布里埃尔·沃克： 因此，要从 10万 吨到数十亿吨，

we're going to have to start really small in this almost nonexistent industry

我们必须从这个几乎不存在的行业中 非常小的规模开始，

and scale it up to the gigaton scale

然后在经济上 将其扩大到数十亿吨的规模，

affordably without causing other undesirable side effects

而不造成其他不良的副作用，

of making sure that these removals are real.

以确保这些移除是真实的。

KPM: On the government side, we need clear guidance and clear regulation.

卡维塔：在政府方面， 我们需要明确的指导和明确的监管。

SC: Good carbon markets must help us to cut emissions from the source.

苏珊·琼巴：良好的碳市场 必须帮助我们从源头上减少排放。

We have to decarbonize our supply chains.

我们必须使我们的供应链脱碳。

We have to decarbonize our economies.

我们必须使我们的经济脱碳。

We have to decarbonize our lifestyles.

我们必须使我们的生活方式脱碳。

TTO: I think deep listening really matters

塔玛拉：我认为深度倾听 对于像我们今天这样的对话真的很重要，

for conversations like the ones we had today

and the ongoing thorniness of people who feel threatened

以及对一个正在衰退的 星球感到威胁的人

by a planet in decline trying to make decisions.

试图做出决定的持续刺痛。

JF: The heterodoxy of perspective and opinion stimulates new ideas.

儒勒·弗里德曼：观点和 意见的异质性激发了新的想法。

And if you start the conversations with respect and with open minds,

如果你以尊重和 开放的心态开始对话，

you get to new places.

你就会到达新的地方。

And we had that in our breakout group, for sure.

当然，我们的分组讨论中 有这种情况。

JD: But we need a kind of grounded sense of hope and optimism,

詹姆斯·戴克：但我们需要 一种扎实的希望和乐观感，

which has got kind of rough edges and realism.

这种希望和乐观主义 有粗糙的边缘和现实主义。

Tom Rivett-Carnac: I agree.

汤姆·里维特-卡纳克：我同意。

JD: And we somehow need to embrace those fears

詹姆斯·戴克： 我们以某种方式需要接受这些恐惧，

because often we don't want to, right?

因为我们往往不想，对吧？

TRC: So I think that a stubborn and determined optimism

汤姆·里维特-卡纳克： 所以我认为，绝望的另一面

lies on the other side of despair.

是一种顽固而坚定的乐观主义。

I think you have to go through that and you have to stare into the abyss

我认为你必须经历这一点， 你必须凝视深渊并说：

and say: “This is possible, it may even be likely, but you know what?

“这是可能的， 甚至可能是可能的，但你知道吗？

I'm going to do everything I can at this moment

此时此刻，我将尽我所能做出改变，

to be the change, to create that difference."

创造这种差异。”

TTO: I've never heard so many polite people

塔玛拉·托尔斯·奥拉福林： 我从来没听过这么多有礼貌的人

disagree about things they hate.

对他们讨厌的事情意见不一。

I've never met so many people who hate offsets,

我从来没有见过 这么多讨厌抵消交易的人，

who are still super nice and trying to figure out what could be useful

他们仍然超级友好，试图弄清楚 他们不喜欢的东西有什么有用的。

about a thing they're not sold on.

DB: It is useful to be reminded to like, be patient, to listen, to learn,

唐纳·贝尔德： 提醒人们喜欢、耐心、倾听、学习、

to be open, to be warm, to be generous and kind to people

开放、热情、慷慨和善良地

who are on my side that I disagree with.

对待我不同意的人是有用的。

IY: Sometimes we do need to take a step back

伊内斯·亚巴尔： 有时我们确实需要退后一步，

and not put all that pressure on our own shoulders

不要把所有的压力 都放在我们自己的肩膀上，

that we're going to find the solution.

我们会找到解决方案。

But it’s: How do we generate those connections

但问题是：我们如何产生 这些共同推动我们前进的联系？

that together move us forward?

And maybe one day I will be sadder and I will be less optimistic,

也许有一天我会 更悲伤，不那么乐观，

but someone else will bring that hope to me.

但会有另一个人带给我希望。

AG: When we try to reason collectively,

阿尔·戈尔： 当我们试图集体推理时，

it's really important and valuable to recognize

认识到不同的观点可以增加集体智慧，

that different points of view

这是非常重要和有价值的。

can add to the collective wisdom.

One of the most powerful telescopes in the world

世界上最强大的望远镜之一

had an innovative design when it was built,

在建造时有一个创新的设计，

including the decision to build two virtually identical telescopes

包括决定建造 两个几乎相同的望远镜，

only 60 meters apart.

仅相隔 60 米。

If they're looking at a supernova, 100 million light years away,

如果他们在观察 一颗 1 亿光年之外的超新星，

it turns out that the ability to view that object

事实证明，查看该对象的能力

from two different points of view only 60 meters apart

从两个不同的角度来看，

在一个小星球上相距仅 60 米， 一切都会有所不同，

on a small planet makes all the difference

in the amount of information that can be collected and processed

包括我们可以收集和处理的信息量，

and used to enhance our understanding.

以及用于增强我们理解的信息量。

And the same thing is true when we try to reason together in a group.

而当我们试图 在小组中一起推理时也是如此。

If there are different points of view,

如果有不同的观点，

then the different life experiences of everyone in the group

那么群体中每个人不同的生活经历 可以增加集体智慧，

can add to the collective wisdom

and make the group far smarter

并是群体的智慧 远高于其中最聪明的个体。

than the smartest individual in that group.