Innovating to zero! | Bill Gates

譯者: ChiChang Liu 審譯者: melody yang

I'm going to talk today about energy and climate.

今天我要談的是關於能量和氣候。

And that might seem a bit surprising,

這或許有點讓人意外，因為你們也知道

because my full-time work at the foundation

我在基金會全職的工作主要關於疫苗和種子，

is mostly about vaccines and seeds,

about the things that we need to invent and deliver

這些急需要發明且散佈的事情

to help the poorest two billion live better lives.

以幫助20億貧民過更好生活。

But energy and climate are extremely important to these people;

但是能源和氣候對這些人也極其重要，

in fact, more important than to anyone else on the planet.

實際上，比對地球其他人來說更重要。

The climate getting worse means that many years, their crops won't grow:

氣候變得更壞，使得他們的穀物將有很多年無法成長。

there will be too much rain, not enough rain;

有時將有太多雨，有時將會雨量不足。

things will change in ways their fragile environment simply can't support.

所有改變的方式

以他們脆弱環境實在難以支撐。

And that leads to starvation, it leads to uncertainty, it leads to unrest.

結果將導致飢餓。 導致不確定的恐慌和動亂。

So, the climate changes will be terrible for them.

因此，氣候變化對於他們是十分可怕的。

Also, the price of energy is very important to them.

此外，能源的價格對他們非常重要。

In fact, if you could pick just one thing

實際上，如果你僅僅能挑一件東西降低價格，

to lower the price of to reduce poverty, by far you would pick energy.

以降低貧困，目前能源是最佳選項。

Now, the price of energy has come down over time.

現下，能源的價格已經下降好長一段時間。

Really advanced civilization is based on advances in energy.

真的，人類的文明進步是基於能量的進展。

煤的革命點燃工業革命，

The coal revolution fueled the Industrial Revolution,

and, even in the 1900s, we've seen a very rapid decline

並且，在20世紀我們看見電力的價格迅速下降。

in the price of electricity,

and that's why we have refrigerators, air-conditioning;

因此我們才能擁有冰箱，空調系統，

we can make modern materials and do so many things.

並且能製造進步的材料及那麼多東西。

And so, we're in a wonderful situation with electricity in the rich world.

也因此，我們處於一個有電力的美好富足世界。

But as we make it cheaper -- and let's say,

如果，當我們使它更便宜 --讓我們努力使它兩倍便宜 --

let's go for making it twice as cheap --

we need to meet a new constraint,

我們就必須面臨新的限制，

這限制就是CO2(二氧化碳)。

and that constraint has to do with CO2.

CO2使地球變暖，

CO2 is warming the planet,

而描述CO2的方程式實際上是非常直觀的。

and the equation on CO2 is actually a very straightforward one.

If you sum up the CO2 that gets emitted,

如果你把所有排出的CO2加起來，

that leads to a temperature increase,

那就會導致溫度增加，

and that temperature increase leads to some very negative effects:

而溫度增加進而導致一些負面效果。

the effects on the weather; perhaps worse, the indirect effects,

這效應對天氣有影響，更糟的是或許是其他間接的效應

我們的自然生態系統不能適應這些迅速的變化，

in that the natural ecosystems can't adjust to these rapid changes,

and so you get ecosystem collapses.

生態系統因而崩潰。

Now, the exact amount of how you map from a certain increase of CO2

現在對於精確的數據對應

例如在CO2的增加量與溫度上昇幅度的對應

to what temperature will be, and where the positive feedbacks are --

以及是否有正向的回饋的存在

there's some uncertainty there, but not very much.

有些不確定性但不算太多

And there's certainly uncertainty about how bad those effects will be,

當然對於這些效應有多糟的看法，也有不確定性

but they will be extremely bad.

但方向上一定是相當糟的

I asked the top scientists on this several times:

我好幾次就這議題問過幾位頂尖的科學家，

Do we really have to get down to near zero?

我們真的必須將CO2減量至幾近零嗎？

Can't we just cut it in half or a quarter?

只降一半或降至四分之一呢?

And the answer is, until we get near to zero,

而答案是直到我們降至零之前，

the temperature will continue to rise.

溫度還是繼續升高。

And so that's a big challenge.

所以這是一大挑戰。

It's very different than saying,

這跟如何讓一輛12英尺高的卡車穿過一座10英尺高的橋完全不同，

"We're a twelve-foot-high truck trying to get under a ten-foot bridge,

我們只能用力向下緊壓

and we can just sort of squeeze under."

This is something that has to get to zero.

要減量到零，有些事情必須考量。

Now, we put out a lot of carbon dioxide every year --

現在，我們每年排出許多二氧化碳，

over 26 billion tons.

超過260億公頓。

For each American, it's about 20 tons.

大約是每名美國人20公頓。

For people in poor countries, it's less than one ton.

對窮國的人們來說，每人不到一公頓。

It's an average of about five tons for everyone on the planet.

地球上每人的平均大約5 公頓。

And somehow, we have to make changes that will bring that down to zero.

不管如何，我們都必須改變

以減量到零。

It's been constantly going up.

它一直不斷上升。

曾有各種各樣的經濟變化使它的趨勢平緩，

It's only various economic changes that have even flattened it at all,

so we have to go from rapidly rising to falling,

因此我們必須努力從迅速上升的趨勢

開始讓它下降，並且一路下降到零。

and falling all the way to zero.

This equation has four factors, a little bit of multiplication.

這個方程式有四個因子。

及簡單的相乘。

So you've got a thing on the left, CO2, that you want to get to zero,

因此，左式有一因子CO2，你想要它趨於零，

而那必須基於「人口的數量」，

and that's going to be based on the number of people,

the services each person is using on average,

「平均每人享用的服務」，

the energy, on average, for each service,

「每種服務的平均的能源」，

and the CO2 being put out per unit of energy.

及「單位能源排出的CO2」。

So let's look at each one of these,

現在，讓我們逐一審視

and see how we can get this down to zero.

並且想想我們如何能把這變成零。

Probably, one of these numbers is going to have to get pretty near to zero.

或許，這些數字之一必須讓它趨近於零。

(Laughter)

現在讓我們複習中學的代數，

That's back from high school algebra.

But let's take a look.

讓我們瞧瞧。

First, we've got population.

首先是人口。

The world today has 6.8 billion people.

現下，世界有約68億人。

That's headed up to about nine billion.

未來預計增到大約90億。

Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines,

現在，如果我們在新疫苗發展上有不錯的進展，

health care, reproductive health services,

包括醫療保健，生育保健服務

或許會降低約10~15%

we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent.

But there, we see an increase of about 1.3.

但目前是增加約1.3%

The second factor is the services we use.

第2 個因子是我們使用的服務。

This encompasses everything:

這包含了所有的事情，

the food we eat, clothing, TV, heating.

我們吃的食品，衣服，電視，暖氣。

這些是非常好的東西，

These are very good things.

Getting rid of poverty means providing these services

提供這些服務某種程度表示脫離了貧困

to almost everyone on the planet.

如果能遍及地球上所有的人。

And it's a great thing for this number to go up.

增加這數量其實是好事

In the rich world, perhaps the top one billion,

在富有的世界，或許前10億人口，

we probably could cut back and use less,

我們或許能縮減享受以減少用量，

but every year, this number, on average, is going to go up,

但是每年，這平均數目是上升的，

整體說來，將來會成為兩倍以上

and so, overall, that will more than double

the services delivered per person.

提供每人所享有的服務量

Here we have a very basic service:

現在我們來談一項非常基本的服務。

Do you have lighting in your house to be able to read your homework?

你房子內有照明讓你能做你的家庭作業嗎?

And, in fact, these kids don't,

實際上，很多孩子沒有，因此他們必須到屋外

so they're going out and reading their schoolwork

並且在路燈下研讀他們的功課。

under the street lamps.

Now, efficiency, "E," the energy for each service --

再來，講到效率，E，指每種服務所需的能量，

here, finally we have some good news.

總算有一些好消息。

We have something that's not going up.

某些事情並沒有增加。

Through various inventions and new ways of doing lighting,

透過各式各樣的發明和製作照明設備的新方法，

through different types of cars, different ways of building buildings --

透過不同的汽車類型，建築大樓的不同方法。

there are a lot of services

有許多你所使用的服務

where you can bring the energy for that service down

整體而言已大幅降低消耗的能量

quite substantially.

Some individual services even bring it down by 90 percent.

某些項目甚至降了幾乎90%

There are other services, like how we make fertilizer,

但仍有不少項目如肥料製造

及空中運輸等

or how we do air transport,

where the rooms for improvement are far, far less.

能夠改善的空間實在不大

And so overall, if we're optimistic, we may get a reduction

因此概括的看，如果我們是樂觀主義者

我們有可能降低到三分之一，甚或到六分之一

of a factor of three to even, perhaps, a factor of six.

But for these first three factors now,

但是現在對這些前3 個因素來說，

we've gone from 26 billion to, at best, maybe 13 billion tons,

我們或許充其量從260億降到130億公頓，

and that just won't cut it.

且很難再往下降

So let's look at this fourth factor -- this is going to be a key one --

因此讓我們看第4因素 --

這將是關鍵的一項 --

and this is the amount of CO2 put out per each unit of energy.

每消耗單位能量所排出的CO2的數量。

So the question is: Can you actually get that to zero?

問題是，你真的能讓它趨於零？

If you burn coal, no.

燃燒煤，不可能。

If you burn natural gas, no.

燃燒天然氣，不可能。

Almost every way we make electricity today,

幾乎我們今天用來發電的任一方法，

except for the emerging renewables and nuclear, puts out CO2.

除了新興的再生能源和核能，都會排出CO2。

And so, what we're going to have to do at a global scale,

因此，我們以全球性角度考量將來必須做的，

is create a new system.

是創建一新系統。

So we need energy miracles.

我們需要能源奇蹟。

Now, when I use the term "miracle," I don't mean something that's impossible.

我這裡使用奇蹟這個詞，並不意味著不可能發生。

微處理器是一個奇蹟。 個人電腦是一個奇蹟。

The microprocessor is a miracle.

The personal computer is a miracle.

The Internet and its services are a miracle.

網際網路及其各項服務是一個奇蹟。

So the people here have participated in the creation of many miracles.

因此，在場各位已經共同參與創造過很多奇蹟。

Usually, we don't have a deadline

通常，我們不設期限，

where you have to get the miracle by a certain date.

不要求你必須在某天讓奇蹟出現。

Usually, you just kind of stand by, and some come along, some don't.

通常，你只要努力準備好，有些會發生，有些則沒有。

This is a case where we actually have to drive at full speed

但在這件事上我們必須加足馬力

and get a miracle in a pretty tight timeline.

並在緊迫的時限內創造出奇蹟

Now, I thought, "How could I really capture this?

現在，我在想，我如何才能辦得到？

Is there some kind of natural illustration,

是否有自然的圖示

some demonstration that would grab people's imagination here?"

或其他現成的範例可以讓人們想像?

I thought back to a year ago when I brought mosquitoes,

我回想起一年前我帶一罐蚊子來到這裡

and somehow people enjoyed that.

人們似乎覺得有趣

(Laughter)

(笑聲)

It really got them involved in the idea of, you know,

這確實讓他們了解到

不少人與蚊子生活在一起

there are people who live with mosquitoes.

With energy, all I could come up with is this.

所以，關於能源,我所能想到的就是這個

I decided that releasing fireflies

我決定放些螢火蟲

would be my contribution to the environment here this year.

這可能是今年我對環境所做的貢獻

So here we have some natural fireflies.

所以我們將有一些天然的螢火蟲

I'm told they don't bite; in fact, they might not even leave that jar.

我被告知這不會咬人，事實上,它們可能根本無法離開罐子

(Laughter)

(笑聲)

現在有許多花拳繡腿的解決方案就如同剛剛的示範

Now, there's all sorts of gimmicky solutions like that one,

but they don't really add up to much.

而它們實際的貢獻不大

We need solutions, either one or several,

我們需要一個以上的方案

that have unbelievable scale and unbelievable reliability.

必須具有不可置信的規模

以及難以想像的可靠性，

And although there's many directions that people are seeking,

雖然人們正追尋很多的方向，

I really only see five that can achieve the big numbers.

我只看見5種方式，可能達到足夠的需求。

I've left out tide, geothermal, fusion, biofuels.

我已經放棄潮汐、地熱、核融合及生質能

Those may make some contribution,

這些當然都能有些貢獻

and if they can do better than I expect, so much the better.

但是必須比我預期的好很多、非常多才會有希望

我要說的重點是

But my key point here is that we're going to have to work on

我們將必須持續做這5項

each of these five,

and we can't give up any of them because they look daunting,

我們不能因為氣餒而放棄它們

because they all have significant challenges.

也不能因為有各項顯著挑戰而放棄

Let's look first at burning fossil fuels,

讓我們首先看石化燃料，

either burning coal or burning natural gas.

無論是燃煤或者燒天然氣。

What you need to do there seems like it might be simple, but it's not.

必需要做的好像很簡單，但是實際很困難，

必須在燃燒後將CO2從煙中取出

And that's to take all the CO2,

after you've burned it, going out the flue,

pressurize it, create a liquid, put it somewhere,

加壓液化並放置於某處

and hope it stays there.

並希望能保存在那兒

Now, we have some pilot things

我們有一些先端的研究顯示可以做到百分之60到80的水準，

that do this at the 60 to 80 percent level.

But getting up to that full percentage -- that will be very tricky.

但是做到全部， 那將非常難，

And agreeing on where these CO2 quantities should be put will be hard,

此外選擇這些CO2同意存放的地點也將是艱難的課題，

but the toughest one here is this long-term issue:

但是最困難的是長期的問題。

Who's going to be sure?

誰能確定?

Who's going to guarantee

誰又能對比核廢料或其他廢料多數十億倍的東西

something that is literally billions of times larger

than any type of waste you think of in terms of nuclear or other things?

提出保證？

This is a lot of volume.

這體積十分可觀

So that's a tough one.

因此艱困可期

Next would be nuclear.

接著談到核能

It also has three big problems:

也有三個大問題。

cost, particularly in highly regulated countries, is high;

成本花費，特別是在嚴格管制的國家，是相對高的。

the issue of safety, really feeling good about nothing could go wrong,

關於安全的問題，不會出錯聽起來感覺不錯，

that, even though you have these human operators,

但仍究有人為操作的問題，

the fuel doesn't get used for weapons.

核燃料也不能用於武器

And then what do you do with the waste?

然後，如何處理廢料？

Although it's not very large, there are a lot of concerns about that.

雖然它不是非常多，但是許多人在意此議題。

人們必須感到安心。

People need to feel good about it.

So three very tough problems that might be solvable,

這三個非常棘手的問題可能是能解決的

and so, should be worked on.

因此，應該持續努力。

The last three of the five, I've grouped together.

這五個中的其他三項，我打算一同討論。

These are what people often refer to as the renewable sources.

這些是人們經常提到的所謂再生能源。

And they actually -- although it's great they don't require fuel --

他們實際上 -- 雖然它們很偉大，他們不需要燃料 --

they have some disadvantages.

但仍有一些不利條件。

One is that the density of energy gathered in these technologies

其一是這些技術所能蒐集能源的密度

is dramatically less than a power plant.

大幅的少於一座電廠。

This is energy farming,

這是能源農場，因此談的是好幾平方英里，

so you're talking about many square miles, thousands of times more area

數千倍於你所能想到一個一般電廠的區域。

than you think of as a normal energy plant.

Also, these are intermittent sources.

此外，這些是間歇能源。

The sun doesn't shine all day, it doesn't shine every day,

太陽光並非整天都有，也不是每日都能普照，

and likewise, the wind doesn't blow all the time.

同樣，風也不是颳吹無歇。

And so, if you depend on these sources,

因此，若你要依賴於這些能源，

you have to have some way of getting the energy

你必須有得到能量的輔助方法

during those time periods that it's not available.

以彌補無法提供的時段

So we've got big cost challenges here.

因此，我們有高成本的挑戰。

We have transmission challenges;

我們有輸送的挑戰。

for example, say this energy source is outside your country,

例如，能源來自國外，

你不僅需要技術，

you not only need the technology,

還必須處理來自別處能量的各項風險。

but you have to deal with the risk of the energy coming from elsewhere.

And, finally, this storage problem.

最後，還有能源貯存問題。

為了要評估容量,我仔細審視查閱

To dimensionalize this,

I went through and looked at all the types of batteries made --

目前各種型態的電池

for cars, for computers, for phones, for flashlights, for everything --

包括車用，電腦用，電話用，手電筒用及其他各種用途

and compared that to the amount of electrical energy the world uses.

把那與世界使用的電能數量相比，

What I found is that all the batteries we make now

我發現目前完成所有的電池

could store less than 10 minutes of all the energy.

僅能儲存全世界不到10 分鐘所消耗的能量。

And so, in fact, we need a big breakthrough here,

因此，實際上，我們需要一個大的突破，

something that's going to be a factor of 100 better

那必須是一個100倍優於

than the approaches we have now.

我們現有努力的方法。

It's not impossible, but it's not a very easy thing.

它並非不可能，但是也絕非是件容易的事。

Now, this shows up when you try to get the intermittent source

因此當你努力於得到間歇能源

to be above, say, 20 to 30 percent of what you're using.

如上分析，頂多只能達到使用需求的20~30%

If you're counting on it for 100 percent,

如果要100%的依賴它

你必須有奇蹟電池

you need an incredible miracle battery.

Now, how are we going to go forward on this -- what's the right approach?

我們繼續談論這課題:正確的方向是什麼？

Is it a Manhattan Project? What's the thing that can get us there?

它是一項曼哈頓計畫（製造原子彈的計畫）嗎？ 能帶我們到達目標的是什麼？

Well, we need lots of companies working on this -- hundreds.

嗯，我們需要數以百計的公司投入工作

In each of these five paths, we need at least a hundred people.

在這5 條道路中的每一項，至少需要100 人。

A lot of them, you'll look at and say, "They're crazy."

當中的許多人，你會覺得他們看起來瘋了。 那倒不賴。

That's good.

And, I think, here in the TED group,

這裡是TED，因此我想

we have many people who are already pursuing this.

應該有不少人已經投入了吧

Bill Gross has several companies, including one called eSolar

葛洛斯(Bill Gross)有幾家公司，其中一家叫eSolar

that has some great solar thermal technologies.

有偉大的太陽熱技術。

維諾德·科斯拉(Vinod Khosla)投資許多公司

Vinod Khosla is investing in dozens of companies

that are doing great things and have interesting possibilities,

進行許多偉大的事情並已達令人感到興趣的可能性，

and I'm trying to help back that.

目前我準備協助支持。

Nathan Myhrvold and I actually are backing a company

內森·麥沃爾德(Nathan Myhrvold)和我事實上支持一家公司

that, perhaps surprisingly, is actually taking the nuclear approach.

或許你會訝異，實際上是採取核能的方向。

There are some innovations in nuclear: modular, liquid.

在核能界有一些創新，小型模組化反應器，液態反應器。

Innovation really stopped in this industry quite some ago,

不久前這個領域的創新停滯一段時間，

so the idea that there's some good ideas laying around

所以在此多少有一些好想法不足為奇

is not all that surprising.

The idea of TerraPower is that, instead of burning a part of uranium --

至於Terrapower公司的想法，不是只燃燒鈾的一部分，

the one percent, which is the U235 --

約百分之一，也就是是U235(鈾235)，

we decided, "Let's burn the 99 percent, the U238."

我們決定，設法燃燒百分之99，U238(鈾238)。

It is kind of a crazy idea.

這想法有點兒瘋狂。

In fact, people had talked about it for a long time,

實際上，人們已經談論它很久，

but they could never simulate properly whether it would work or not,

但他們無法適當的模擬確認是否能做到，

and so it's through the advent of modern supercomputers

因此藉由現代超級電腦的進步

that now you can simulate and see that, yes,

現在你能模擬並且發現這是可行的，

with the right materials approach, this looks like it would work.

只要材料改進方法正確，它將可成功運行。

And because you're burning that 99 percent,

且因為你是燃燒那百分之99，

you have greatly improved cost profile.

已經大大改進成本結構。

You actually burn up the waste, and you can actually use as fuel

實際上是消耗掉廢料， 也就是將廢料作為燃料

all the leftover waste from today's reactors.

想想來自今天核電廠全部的廢料。

So instead of worrying about them, you just take that, it's a great thing.

因此，不必再擔心核廢料問題，而是利用它。 這多棒啊。

It breeds this uranium as it goes along, so it's kind of like a candle.

它實行時消耗鈾。 就像蠟燭燃燒一樣。

You see it's a log there, often referred to as a traveling wave reactor.

它就像是根木材，通常稱為推旅波式反應器(Traveling Wave Reactor,TWR)。

In terms of fuel, this really solves the problem.

就燃料而言，這真的解決了問題。

I've got a picture here of a place in Kentucky.

我這裡有在美國肯德基州一處的照片。

This is the leftover, the 99 percent,

這就是殘留的百分之99

where they've taken out the part they burn now,

在這裡他們已經取出可燃燒的部分(即U235)，

因此它被稱為耗乏鈾(U238)。

so it's called depleted uranium.

That would power the US for hundreds of years.

這將能提供美國數百年的電力。

And simply by filtering seawater in an inexpensive process,

僅僅需透過一個廉價的海水過濾程序，

你將有足夠的燃料提供撐過地球整個壽命的能量。

you'd have enough fuel for the entire lifetime of the rest of the planet.

So, you know, it's got lots of challenges ahead,

因此，你知道，即使它須面對許多挑戰，

but it is an example of the many hundreds and hundreds of ideas

但這是數百種想法中的一個例子

that we need to move forward.

驅使我們向前

So let's think: How should we measure ourselves?

現在讓我們想像，我們應該怎樣評量自己？

What should our report card look like?

我們的工作成績鑑定表該像什麼？

Well, let's go out to where we really need to get,

現在讓我們看未來的目標應設定在哪裡

and then look at the intermediate.

對於中期目標而言

For 2050, you've heard many people talk about this 80 percent reduction.

到了2050年，你會聽到很多人談到減量80%的事

到那時，這真的是十分重要的事

That really is very important, that we get there.

And that 20 percent will be used up by things going on in poor countries --

還有20%則是窮國需要的消耗

still some agriculture; hopefully, we will have cleaned up forestry, cement.

例如農業的需求

希望到時已經解決林業、水泥等問題

So, to get to that 80 percent,

因此，要到達減量百分之80，

the developed countries, including countries like China,

已開發國家，包括像中國這樣的國家，

will have had to switch their electricity generation altogether.

都須同時改變電力產生的方式

The other grade is: Are we deploying this zero-emission technology,

所以，下個階段，當我們部署這項零排放的技術時，

have we deployed it in all the developed countries

我們在全部已開發國家都利用它

and are in the process of getting it elsewhere?

並且持續進行在其他國家的部署。

That's super important.

那超級重要的。

That's a key element of making that report card.

那是我們制定工作成績鑑定表的關鍵要素。

Backing up from there, what should the 2020 report card look like?

從那裡退回來，2020的 工作成績鑑定表應該像什麼？

Well, again, it should have the two elements.

同樣的，它應該有兩個要素。

We should go through these efficiency measures to start getting reductions:

我們應該審視這些效率評估，並開始進行減量。

The less we emit, the less that sum will be of CO2,

CO2排的越少，空氣的總量也會較少

and therefore, the less the temperature.

因此，溫度跟著較低。

But in some ways, the grade we get there,

在這階段，就幾方面來說

doing things that don't get us all the way to the big reductions,

作些無法達到大幅減量的事

只能持平或微量減少，其重要性較諸其他

is only equally, or maybe even slightly less, important than the other,

which is the piece of innovation on these breakthroughs.

只是突破性創新的一小部份

These breakthroughs, we need to move those at full speed,

我們所需的突破必須是加足馬力衝刺

並能使用各像參數評估如參與公司數

and we can measure that in terms of companies,

pilot projects, regulatory things that have been changed.

先期計畫及已修訂的法規等

There's a lot of great books that have been written about this.

有許多經典著作已經提到這個。

The Al Gore book, "Our Choice,"

高爾的書，「我們的抉擇」

and the David MacKay book, "Sustainable Energy Without the Hot Air."

以及大衛馬凱的書，「永續能源：免除地獄的業火」

They really go through it and create a framework

他們加以審視並且建立一種架構

這可以被廣泛地討論，

that this can be discussed broadly,

because we need broad backing for this.

因為我們需要得到廣泛的支持。

There's a lot that has to come together.

還有很多必須加以整合

So this is a wish.

因此這是一個願望。

It's a very concrete wish that we invent this technology.

我們要發明這項技術，是個非常具體的願望。

If you gave me only one wish for the next 50 years --

如果你今後50年中只能讓我一個願望成真，

I could pick who's president,

我能指定誰當總統

I could pick a vaccine, which is something I love,

我能指定一種疫苗的出現，那是我最愛的事

or I could pick that this thing

或我能選擇這件事

that's half the cost with no CO2 gets invented --

只要一半的花費就能發明無CO2排放的技術

this is the wish I would pick.

這將是我會選擇的願望

This is the one with the greatest impact.

這願望會有最大的影響力

If we don't get this wish,

如果無法完成這願望

the division between the people who think short term and long term

長期與短期來看人們間差距將變的十分可怕

will be terrible,

between the US and China, between poor countries and rich,

在美國與中國之間，窮國與富國之間

and most of all,

20億貧民中的大部分人生活將變得更壞。

the lives of those two billion will be far worse.

So what do we have to do?

因此，我們必須做什麼？

What am I appealing to you to step forward and drive?

我在呼籲你們向前並且推動的是什麼？

We need to go for more research funding.

我們急需更多的研究資金

When countries get together in places like Copenhagen,

當許多國家聚集在某處如哥本哈根

他們不該只討論CO2。

they shouldn't just discuss the CO2.

They should discuss this innovation agenda.

他們應該討論這項創新議程，

You'd be stunned at the ridiculously low levels of spending

你會訝異願意投入在此的經費是如此低

on these innovative approaches.

即使這些是多麼具創新的方案

We do need the market incentives -- CO2 tax, cap and trade --

我們確實需要市場獎勵，CO2稅，限額交易，

something that gets that price signal out there.

一些能反映到價格上的機制

We need to get the message out.

我們需要將訊息傳佈出去

We need to have this dialogue be a more rational,

我們需要更理性與可理解的對話

more understandable dialogue,

including the steps that the government takes.

包括政府所採行的步驟

This is an important wish, but it is one I think we can achieve.

這是個重要的願望，但這也是我們能做到的。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

(掌聲)

(Applause ends)

Thank you.

謝謝。

Chris Anderson: Thank you. Thank you.

(克力斯安德森,以下CA):謝謝。 謝謝。

(Applause)

(掌聲)

CA: Thank you.

謝謝。如此讓我對泰拉能源公司（Terrapower）多了解一些,沒說錯吧--

So to understand more about TerraPower.

I mean, first of all, can you give a sense of what scale of investment this is?

首先，請讓我們大概了解這項投資的規模有多大?

Bill Gates: To actually do the software, buy the supercomputer,

(比爾蓋茲，以下BG)：實際上超級電腦的軟體

hire all the great scientists, which we've done,

及僱用一些偉大的科學家等已經做的

that's only tens of millions.

只花費約幾千萬美金

And even once we test our materials out in a Russian reactor

每次對於材料方法在俄羅斯反應器的測試

以確定是否可行

to make sure our materials work properly,

then you'll only be up in the hundreds of millions.

則需花費約幾億美金

The tough thing is building the pilot reactor --

最困難的是建立先期試驗性的反應器

finding the several billion, finding the regulator, the location

必須尋求數十億資金、尋求法規支持、還有地點

that will actually build the first one of these.

才可能建立完成第一座

Once you get the first one built, if it works as advertised,

一旦建造了第一座，它就成了活廣告

then it's just clear as day,

隨著時間將讓大家明白，因為經濟學、能量密度等考量

because the economics, the energy density, are so different

和我們理解的核能大不相同

than nuclear as we know it.

CA: So to understand it right,

CA：我再確認一下，是不是要有深入地下的建築

this involves building deep into the ground,

almost like a vertical column of nuclear fuel, of this spent uranium,

就像垂直的核燃料柱

裡面充滿鈾廢料

and then the process starts at the top and kind of works down?

整個核反應由上往下進行呢?

BG: That's right.

BG︰ 沒錯。 今天，反應器總是需重新裝填核燃料，

Today, you're always refueling the reactor,

so you have lots of people and lots of controls that can go wrong,

因此許多人為和許多控制可能出錯，

where you're opening it up and moving things in and out --

因為你必須打開它並將一些物質移進移出的。

that's not good.

我不認為那是好事。

So if you have very --

因此，如果你有非常便宜的燃料且能放置60 年 --

(Laughter)

very cheap fuel that you can put 60 years in --

just think of it as a log --

就當它是一根木材 --

put it down and not have those same complexities.

把它放下去並沒有那麼複雜。

And it just sits there and burns for the 60 years, and then it's done.

就讓它呆在那裡並且燃燒60 年，一切都解決了。

CA: It's a nuclear power plant that is its own waste disposal solution.

CA:所以這是一座能自己處置核廢料的核能發電廠。

BG: Yeah; what happens with the waste,

BG︰ 是的。 嗯，關於核廢料的部份

you can let it sit there -- there's a lot less waste under this approach --

就讓它留在那裡 -- 用這種方法產生較少的廢料 --

then you can actually take that

而且能取出處理，

and put it into another one and burn that.

並且把它放進另一個反應器燃燒。

And we start out, actually, by taking the waste that exists today

事實上我們可以由現有的核廢料開始

that's sitting in these cooling pools or dry-casking by reactors --

目前都存在冷卻水槽或乾式儲存護箱內

that's our fuel to begin with.

這些是可以開始使用的燃料

So the thing that's been a problem from those reactors

因此，這些曾被視為問題的核反應器

is actually what gets fed into ours,

可以裝入我們的裝置

and you're reducing the volume of the waste quite dramatically

因而大幅降低核廢料的體積

as you're going through this process.

並同時進行發電的程序

CA: You're talking to different people around the world

CA：你對全世界不同的人談論這議題

及其可能性

about the possibilities.

Where is there most interest in actually doing something with this?

哪些地方對於實際進行此計畫最感興趣？

BG: Well, we haven't picked a particular place,

BG︰ 嗯，我們沒特別挑什麼地方，

關於核能的任何事情總是有人表示興趣

and there's all these interesting disclosure rules

about anything that's called "nuclear."

So we've got a lot of interest.

有不少人向我們表達興趣

People from the company have been in Russia, India, China.

例如來自俄羅斯、印度、中國等國公司的人們

I've been back seeing the secretary of energy here,

我曾遇過能源部長，

talking about how this fits into the energy agenda.

並討論如何將此置入能量議程。

So I'm optimistic.

因此我很樂觀。 你知道法國和日本已經完成了一些工作。

The French and Japanese have done some work.

This is a variant on something that has been done.

他們所完成的與這提的並不相同

It's an important advance, but it's like a fast reactor,

那是很重要的進展，但那像是個快滋生反應器（fast reactor）

and a lot of countries have built them,

有不少國家參與建造

so anybody who's done a fast reactor is a candidate

所以任何有快滋生反應器的地方，將會是我們考量第一座電廠的候選場址

to be where the first one gets built.

CA: So, in your mind,

CA：因此，在你的頭腦裡，時間規模和各項可能

timescale and likelihood of actually taking something like this live?

在這輩子能夠完成到什麼狀況呢?

BG: Well, we need -- for one of these high-scale, electro-generation things

BG：嗯，我們需要建立一個大規模、發電系統

且必須非常便宜，

that's very cheap,

we have 20 years to invent and then 20 years to deploy.

我們只有20 年來發明並用20 年來部署。

That's sort of the deadline

這期限來自環境模型的推演

that the environmental models have shown us that we have to meet.

而我們必須去正視且遵循

And TerraPower -- if things go well, which is wishing for a lot --

你知道嗎，如果一切順利，我們期許泰拉能源公司

可以輕易達成目標。

could easily meet that.

And there are, fortunately now, dozens of companies --

幸運的是現在有數十家公司

we need it to be hundreds --

而我們需要的是數百家

who, likewise, if their science goes well,

同樣的，如果他們科技發展一切順利

if the funding for their pilot plants goes well,

如果他們建立先期試驗電廠集資順利

that they can compete for this.

他們就能有競爭力

And it's best if multiple succeed,

當然如果有多重方法成功那更好

because then you could use a mix of these things.

那我們就可以妥為混用這些技術

We certainly need one to succeed.

我們就是需要一項解決技術的成功

CA: In terms of big-scale possible game changers,

CA：若考量大規模的競爭環境變化

is this the biggest that you're aware of out there?

這是您所知道最具優勢的方案嗎?

BG: An energy breakthrough is the most important thing.

BG:能源技術突破是最重要的事情。

It would have been, even without the environmental constraint,

就算不考慮環境侷限也該如此

而因為環境侷限讓他顯得更偉大

but the environmental constraint just makes it so much greater.

In the nuclear space, there are other innovators.

在核能領域，仍有其他創新者

You know, we don't know their work as well as we know this one,

我們對他們的不了解可能和我們對這的了解一樣多

but the modular people, that's a different approach.

對於提倡小型模組化反應器的人來說，那是另一種處理方式

還有液態反應器感覺上很困難

There's a liquid-type reactor, which seems a little hard,

but maybe they say that about us.

但也許他們看我們也是一樣的想法

And so, there are different ones,

確實有其他方案

but the beauty of this is a molecule of uranium

但是美妙之處都在於鈾分子

has a million times as much energy as a molecule of, say, coal.

具有其他分子如煤炭，百萬倍以上的能量

And so, if you can deal with the negatives,

因此如果能夠處理好負面效應

通常指輻射

which are essentially the radiation, the footprint and cost,

碳足跡、成本、發展潛力

the potential, in terms of effect on land and various things,

包含對陸地與其他事務的效應

is almost in a class of its own.

那都可視為是相同等級的方案

CA：如果不成功，該怎麼辦?

CA: If this doesn't work, then what?

Do we have to start taking emergency measures

是否要啟動緊急機制

to try and keep the temperature of the earth stable?

以試圖保持地球溫度的穩定?

BG: If you get into that situation,

BG：如果到了那種狀況

it's like if you've been overeating, and you're about to have a heart attack.

就好像你已過度飲食，心臟病就要發作了

Then where do you go?

你要怎麼辦呢?可能要動心臟手術或其他處理。

You may need heart surgery or something.

There is a line of research on what's called geoengineering,

有一系列研究稱為大地工程

which are various techniques that would delay the heating

那是延遲暖化的各種技術

to buy us 20 or 30 years to get our act together.

以爭取增加20或者30 年的緩衝時間整合我們的行動。

Now, that's just an insurance policy; you hope you don't need to do that.

現下，那只是一項保險政策。

你會希望不要用到

Some people say you shouldn't even work on the insurance policy

有些人會說你不應該投入進行保險政策

因為它可能使你偷懶，

because it might make you lazy,

它會使你一直吃，因為你知道有心臟手術將會救你。

that you'll keep eating because you know heart surgery will be there to save you.

我不能確信是否明智，如果考量問題的重要性，

I'm not sure that's wise, given the importance of the problem,

現在有關於大地工程的討論

but there's now the geoengineering discussion

about: Should that be in the back pocket in case things happen faster,

談論是要將此技術置於後口袋，以免變化快於預期？

or this innovation goes a lot slower than we expect?

或是該減慢這項創新

CA: Climate skeptics:

CA：對於氣候懷疑論者，你有什麼話要對他們說，

If you had a sentence or two to say to them,

你如何說服他們說他們錯了？

how might you persuade them that they're wrong?

BG: Well, unfortunately, the skeptics come in different camps.

BG：嗯，令人遺憾，那些懷疑者來自不同的陣營。

The ones who make scientific arguments are very few.

他們很少提出科學的論點。

Are they saying there's negative feedback effects

他們有提到必須考量雲層抵銷

that have to do with clouds that offset things?

的負回饋效應嗎?

There are very, very few things that they can even say

他們所能談的不多

這兒有成千上萬的例子

there's a chance in a million of those things.

The main problem we have here -- it's kind of like with AIDS:

現在主要的問題就像愛滋病

you make the mistake now, and you pay for it a lot later.

現在做錯誤的決定，未來要付出更多

And so, when you have all sorts of urgent problems,

所以當你有些急迫的問題

the idea of taking pain now that has to do with a gain later,

記得寧可現在嚐栽種之苦，未來才有收穫--

更何況未來還有不可知的痛苦等著

and a somewhat uncertain pain thing.

In fact, the IPCC report -- that's not necessarily the worst case,

實際上，IPPC報告所提，還不一定是最壞情況，

and there are people in the rich world who look at IPCC and say,

在富有的世界有人看IPPC報告

會覺得還好啊，那有什麼大不了。

"OK, that isn't that big of a deal."

The fact is it's that uncertain part that should move us towards this.

事實上還有不確定的部份驅使著我們朝這方向前進

But my dream here is that,

但我的夢想是，是否能使它更經濟，

if you can make it economic, and meet the CO2 constraints,

並且符合CO2 限制，

then the skeptics say,

然後那些懷疑論者會說：「好吧，

"OK, I don't care that it doesn't put out CO2,

我不在乎它是否排CO2，

I kind of wish it did put out CO2.

我還希望能排出點CO2呢，

But I guess I'll accept it,

但是我猜我會接受它，因為這比以前來的便宜。」

because it's cheaper than what's come before."

(Applause)

(掌聲)

CA：我想那也是你對藍博(Bjorn Lomborg)論點的回應

CA: So that would be your response to the Bjørn Lomborg argument,

basically if you spend all this energy trying to solve the CO2 problem,

那論點基本上是指如果所有資源都拿去解決CO2問題

it's going to take away all your other goals

那將排擠其他所有目標

of trying to rid the world of poverty and malaria and so forth,

例如遠離貧窮與瘧疾等其他議題

it's a stupid waste of the Earth's resources

把錢放在CO2上是地球資源愚蠢的浪費

to put money towards that

when there are better things we can do.

有更重要的事要做

BG: Well, the actual spending on the R&D piece --

BG：嗯，實際在研發上的花費 --

say the US should spend 10 billion a year more than it is right now --

我必須說美國每年應該投入比現在多100億 --

it's not that dramatic.

這不誇張。

It shouldn't take away from other things.

它不應該排擠其他事情。

The thing you get into big money on, and reasonable people can disagree,

如果你要花費一筆大錢，當然人們是不同意的

is when you have something that's non-economic

尤其是集資的目的是花在不經濟的議題上

and you're trying to fund that --

而那些大多對我來說是浪費

that, to me, mostly is a waste.

Unless you're very close,

除非你十分封閉且只資助學習曲線

and you're just funding the learning curve and it's going to get very cheap,

而未來會變很便宜的

I believe we should try more things

我相信我們應嘗試各項有潛力的事

that have a potential to be far less expensive.

以讓能源價格大幅降低

If the trade-off you get into is, "Let's make energy super expensive,"

如果你參與的交易，是要讓能源更貴

then the rich can afford that.

那只有富人能享有。

I mean, all of us here could pay five times as much for our energy

我的意思是，在場各位都能對於我們的能源付五倍的錢

and not change our lifestyle.

而不需改變我們的生活模式。

The disaster is for that two billion.

受害的是最窮的20億人。

And even Lomborg has changed.

就算蘭博也已經改變。

His shtick now is, "Why isn't the R&D getting more discussed?"

他現在的重點在於為何不多加討論研發

He's still, because of his earlier stuff,

因為他早期關心的題材，

still associated with the skeptic camp,

仍然與懷疑論陣營有關，

but he's realized that's a pretty lonely camp,

不過他意識到那是一個相當孤獨的陣營，

and so, he's making the R&D point.

所以他現在專注於研發議題

And so there is a thread of something that I think is appropriate.

順著這脈絡，我想這樣說是適當的

The R&D piece -- it's crazy how little it's funded.

關於研發這塊，它所獲得的資金真是少的誇張。

CA: Well, Bill, I suspect I speak on behalf of most people here

CA：好的比爾，我懷疑我是在幫在場的人請命

老實說，我真的希望你的願望實現。 非常感謝。

to say I really hope your wish comes true.

Thank you so much.

BG：謝謝。

BG: Thank you.

(Applause)

(掌聲)