Can we solve global warming? Lessons from how we protected the ozone layer | Sean Davis

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Helen Chang

So, I'm a climate scientist,

我是氣候科學家，

and if this room is representative of the country we live in,

如果這間房間代表 我們居住的國家，

that means about 60 percent of you, so maybe from about there over,

那就表示在座有六成左右的人， 大約是從那裡開始的人，

don't strongly trust me for information on the causes of climate change.

不太相信我所提供 關於氣候變遷成因的相關資訊。

Now, I promise to tell the truth tonight,

我保證今天晚上說的都是真相，

but just to humor that demographic,

但單純為了迎合那部分人口，

I've started this talk with a falsehood.

我用假話來開場。 【巴黎氣候協定認定…】

[The Paris Climate Accord is a product of the recognition

【巴黎氣候協定認定 氣候變遷是全球問題的產物…】

這段陳述並不是歐巴馬總統說的， 【巴黎氣候協定認定…】

that climate change is a global problem ...]

This statement was not made by President Obama.

事實上是雷根總統説的。 【…氣候變遷是全球問題的產物…】

It was made by President Reagan,

【巴黎氣候協定認定 氣候變遷是全球問題的產物…】

重點不在氣候變遷或巴黎氣候協定， 【…氣候變遷是全球問題的產物…】

and it wasn't about climate change and the Paris Climate Accord.

It was actually about the Montreal Protocol

重點其實是蒙特婁議定書， 【…氣候變遷是全球問題的產物…】

and stratospheric ozone depletion.

以及平流層的臭氧耗損。 【…氣候變遷是全球問題的產物…】

【巴黎氣候協定認定 氣候變遷是全球問題的產物…】

Now, I'm sure that many of you aren't familiar with this environmental problem,

我相信許多人並不熟悉 這個環境問題，

but you should be,

但你們應該要知道它，

because it's a rare environmental success story.

因為它是個罕見的環境成功故事。

And it's worth revisiting,

它值得被重新審視，

because sometimes, we need to examine the world we've avoided

因為有時我們得要探討 被我們避免的世界，

in order to find guidance for the choices we make today.

才能為我們現今的選擇找到指南。

So let's go back to the 1970s,

讓我們回到七○年代，

when some questionable choices were made:

當時做了些蠻可疑的選擇：

first of all -- hoo -- hairstyles. (Laughs)

首先......呼，髮型。（笑聲）

Second of all, objectively terrible quantities of hairspray,

第二，客觀來說，巨量的噴髮定形劑，

and third, CFCs, chlorofluorocarbons,

第三，氯氟烴，簡稱 CFC，

man-made chemicals that were used as propellant in aerosol spray cans.

人造的化學物質，被用來 當氣溶膠噴罐的噴射劑。

And see, it turns out these CFCs were a problem

結果發現，CFC 是個問題，

because they were destroying the ozone layer.

因為它們會破壞臭氧層。

Now I'm sure most of you have heard of the ozone layer,

我相信大部分人都聽過臭氧層，

but why does it matter?

但它為什麼重要？

Well, quite simply, the ozone layer is earth's sunscreen,

很簡單，臭氧層是地球的遮陽板，

and it's really fragile.

且它很脆弱。

If you could take all of the ozone,

大部分的臭氧在我們頭上 十到二十英哩高的地方，

which is mostly about 10 to 20 miles up above our heads,

and compress it down to the surface of the earth,

若你能把所有的臭氧 向下壓到地球的表面，

it would form a thin shell only about two pennies thick,

它會形式一層薄薄的殼， 大約只有兩個一分硬幣的厚度，

about an eighth of an inch.

約八分之一英吋。

And that thin shell does an amazing amount of work, though.

不過，那層薄殼起了大大的作用。

It filters out more than 90 percent of the harmful UV radiation

它過濾掉超過九成

來自太陽的有害紫外線輻射。

coming from the sun.

And while I'm sure many of you enjoy that suntan that you get

雖然我相信許多人很享受

用那剩下的一成來把皮膚曬黑，

from the remaining 10 percent, it causes a lot of problems:

但它會造成很多問題：白內障、

cataracts,

damage to crops,

損害作物、

damage to immune systems

損害免疫系統，

and also skin cancer.

還有皮膚癌。

It's not an exaggeration

說危害臭氧層就是危害人類 一點也不誇張。

to say that a threat to the ozone layer is a threat to human safety.

And actually, ironically, it was human safety

其實很諷刺的是

一開始發明 CFC 的動機 就是為了人類安全。

that motivated the invention of CFCs in the first place.

You see, in the early days of refrigeration,

在冷藏的早期，

refrigerators used toxic and flammable chemicals

冰箱使用有毒且可燃的化學物質，

like propane and ammonia.

比如丙烷和氨。

For good reason, the refrigeration industry

有充分的理由，製冷產業 想要找安全的替代方案，

wanted a safe alternative,

and they found that in 1928,

1928 年，他們找到了，

when a scientist named Thomas Midgley

有個名叫托馬斯 · 米基利的科學家

synthesized the first commercially viable CFCs.

最先合成出了 能用在商業上的 CFC。

And in fact, Midgley famously inhaled CFCs and blew out a candle

事實上，米基利有項 為人所知的事蹟，

在一個科學大會上，他吸入 CFC 之後再將它吐向蠟燭，

to demonstrate, at a scientific conference,

展示 CFC 是安全的且不可燃的。

that they were safe and nonflammable.

And in fact, as a scientist, I can tell you there is no way

事實上，身為科學家， 我可以告訴各位，

現今你無法靠那種鬼把戲得逞。

you could get away with that kind of antic today.

I mean, wow.

我是指，哇。

But really, at the time,

但，說真的，在當時，

CFCs were a really remarkable invention.

CFC 是真的很了不起的發明。

They allowed what we now know as modern-day refrigeration

CFC 讓我們現在所知的現代冷藏、

and air-conditioning and other things.

冷氣空調等成為可能。

So it wasn't actually until over 40 years later, in the 1970s,

所以，一直到四十年後，

到了七○年代，

when scientists realized that CFCs would break down high in the atmosphere

科學家才了解到 CFC 在大氣高空會瓦解,

and damage the ozone layer.

並傷害臭氧層。

And this finding really set off a lot of public concern.

這項發現真的引發了 大眾的大量關注。

It led, ultimately, to the banning of CFC usage in aerosol spray cans

最終，它導致 1978 年 美國及幾個其他國家

禁止使用 CFC 來做氣溶膠噴罐。

in the US and a few other countries in 1978.

Now, the story doesn't end there,

故事還沒結束，

because CFCs were used in much more than just spray cans.

因為除了氣溶膠噴罐， 還有很多東西用到 CFC。

In 1985, scientists discovered the Antarctic ozone hole,

1985 年，科學家發現 南極上空的臭氧有破洞，

and this was a truly alarming discovery.

那是個非常有警示性的發現。

Scientists did not expect this at all.

科學家完全沒有預期到。

在南極臭氧破洞之前，

Before the Antarctic ozone hole,

scientists expected maybe a five or 10 percent reduction

科學家預期臭氧一個世紀

會減少大約 5% 或 10%。

in ozone over a century.

But what they found over the course of less than a decade

但結果他們發現， 在不到十年的時間，

was that more than a third of the ozone had simply vanished,

超過三分之一的臭氧消失了，

over an area larger than the size of the US.

等同一個比美國還大的面積。

And although we now know that CFCs are the root cause of this ozone hole,

雖然現在我們知道 CFC 是臭氧破洞的原兇，

at the time, the science was far from settled.

在當時科學根本沒有定論。

Yet despite this uncertainty,

但，儘管有這不確定性，

the crisis helped spur nations to act.

也因為出現這項危機， 各國才採取行動。

So that quote that I started this talk with,

所以我在演說一開始的引言，

about the Montreal Protocol, from President Reagan --

引述雷根總統對 蒙特婁議定書的引言──

that was his signing statement when he signed the Montreal Protocol

那是在美國參議院一致通過之後，

after its unanimous ratification by the US Senate.

他簽署蒙特婁議定書時的簽署聲明。

And this is something that's truly worth celebrating.

這是真的很值得慶祝的事。

In fact, yesterday was the 30th anniversary of the Montreal Protocol.

事實上，昨天是 蒙特婁議定書的三十週年。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Because of the protocol,

因為該議定書，

ozone-depleting substances are now declining in our atmosphere,

如今大氣中消耗臭氧的物質減少了，

and we're starting to see the first signs of healing in the ozone layer.

我們也開始看到臭氧層 康復的第一個徵兆。

And furthermore, because many of those ozone-depleting substances

此外，因為許多會消耗臭氧的物質

are also very potent greenhouse gases,

同時也是非常強力的溫室氣體，

the Montreal Protocol has actually delayed global warming

蒙特婁議定書其實也將 全球暖化延遲了至少十年。

by more than a decade.

That's just wonderful.

那真的很好。

But I think it's worth asking the question,

但，我認為有個問題值得去問，

as we face our current environmental crisis, global warming,

面對目前的環境危機 「全球暖化」之際，

what lessons can we learn from Montreal?

我們能從蒙特婁議定書學到些什麼？

Are there any? I think there are.

有嗎？我認為有。

First, we don't need absolute certainty to act.

首先，我們不需要等到 完全肯定才採取行動。

When Montreal was signed,

蒙特婁議定書被簽署時，

we were less certain then of the risks from CFCs

我們那時對於 CFC 會造成風險的確定程度，

than we are now of the risks from greenhouse gas emissions.

還不及我們現在對於溫室氣體 排放會造成風險的肯定程度。

A common tactic that people who oppose climate action use

反對為氣候採取行動的人， 最常採用的戰術

is to completely ignore risk and focus only on uncertainty.

就是完全忽略風險， 把焦點放在不確定性上。

But so what about uncertainty?

但，不確定性又怎樣？

We make decisions in the face of uncertainty all the time,

我們總在面對不確定性時做決策，

literally all the time.

真的總是如此。

You know, I'll bet those of you who drove here tonight,

我敢說，今天晚上開車來這裡的人

you probably wore your seat belt.

可能都繫上安全帶。

And so ask yourself,

所以，問問自己，

did you wear your seat belt because someone told you

你繫上安全帶是因為有人

with a hundred percent [certainty]

百分之百肯定地告訴你，

that you would get in a car crash on the way here?

你到這裡的路上會發生車禍嗎？

Probably not.

應該不是。

So that's the first lesson.

那是第一課。

Risk management and decision making always have uncertainty.

風險管理和決策總是會有不確定性。

Ignoring risk and focusing only on uncertainty is a distraction.

忽略風險，只著重不確定性， 是在轉移注意力。

In other words, inaction is an action.

換言之，不採取行動 本身就是一種行動。

Second, it takes a village to raise a healthy environment.

第二，要整村人同心協力 才能建起健康的環境。

The Montreal Protocol wasn't just put together by industry and governments

促成蒙特婁議定書的 不只是產業及政府，

or environmental advocacy groups and scientists.

或環境擁護團體和科學家。

It was put together by all of them.

是他們全部聯手促成的。

They all had a seat at the table,

他們全都參了一腳，

and they all played an important role in the solution.

都在解決方案中承擔重要角色。

And I think in this regard,

我認為，現今我們在這點上 確實看到些振奮人心的徵兆。

we're actually seeing some encouraging signs today.

We see not just environmental groups concerned about climate change

我們看到，不僅環境團體 關心氣候變遷，

but also civic and religious groups,

還有公民團體和宗教團體，

the military and businesses.

軍方和企業。

So wherever you find yourself on that spectrum,

所以，不論你在光譜上的哪個位置，

we need you at the table,

我們也需要你參與，

because if we're going to solve global warming,

因為，如果我們要解決全球暖化， 會需要各層級都採取行動，

it's going to take actions at all levels,

from the individual to the international

從個人層級到國際層級，

and everything in between.

以及中間的每個層級。

Third lesson:

第三課：

don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

不要讓「完美」成為「好」的敵人。

While Montreal has become the brake pedal for stopping ozone depletion,

雖然蒙特婁議定書已成 阻止臭氧消耗的煞車踏板，

at its beginning, it was more just like a tap on the brakes.

一開始，它更像 只是輕輕點了一下煞車。

It was actually the later amendments to the protocol

實際上要等議定書被修訂之後 才真正做出決策，

that really marked the decision to hit the brakes on ozone depletion.

要一腳踩到底，煞住臭氧的消耗。

So to those who despair

所以，若你感到灰心，

that the Paris Climate Accord didn't go far enough

覺得巴黎氣候協定做得不夠，

or that your limited actions on their own won't solve global warming,

或是光靠你有限的行動， 無法解決全球暖化，

I say don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

我會說，別讓 「完美」成為「好」的敵人。

And finally, I think it helps us to contemplate the world we've avoided.

最後，我認為仔細思忖被我們 避開的世界會有幫助。

Indeed, the world we have avoided by enacting the Montreal Protocol

的確，我們制定蒙特婁 議定書而避免的世界

is one of catastrophic changes

是個災難巨變的世界，

to our environment and to human well-being.

不論是在環境面上或人類幸福面上。

By the 2030s, we'll be avoiding millions of new skin cancer cases per year

到 2030 年代，

我們每年能避免數百萬個 新的皮膚癌案例，

with a number that would only grow.

這個數字只會不斷上升。

If I'm lucky, I'll live long enough to see the end of this animation

如果我很幸運，我會活得夠久 可以看到這段動畫的結尾，

and to see the ozone hole restored to its natural state.

看到臭氧破洞 被復原到自然的狀態。

So as we write the story for earth's climate future

當我們為地球的氣候未來 寫這個世紀以及之後的故事時，

for this century and beyond,

we need to ask ourselves, what will our actions be

得要自問：我們要採取什麼行動，

so that someone can stand on this stage

才能讓三十年、 五十年，或一百年後，

in 30 or 50 or a hundred years

能夠有人站在這個舞台上，

to celebrate the world that they've avoided.

慶祝他們避免掉災難的世界。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）