Can we stop climate change by removing CO2 from the air? | Tim Kruger

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Regina Chu

To avoid dangerous climate change,

若要避免危險的氣候變遷，

we're going to need to cut emissions rapidly.

我們需要快速地將排放縮減。

That should be a pretty uncontentious statement,

這段聲明應該是不會引起爭論的，

certainly with this audience.

對你們這些觀眾肯定是如此。

But here's something that's slightly more contentious:

但，以下就稍微比較爭議一點了：

it's not going to be enough.

這麼做還不夠。

We will munch our way through our remaining carbon budget

我們會把剩餘的碳預算給用盡，

for one and a half degrees

用在 1.5 度上，

in a few short years,

只要短短幾年就會用盡，

and the two degree budget

至於 2 度的預算，

in about two decades.

大約會在二十年後用盡。

We need to not only cut emissions extremely rapidly,

我們不僅需要極快速地將排放縮減，

we also need to take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.

我們也需要把二氧化碳 從大氣中除去。

Thank you.

謝謝你們。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

I work assessing a whole range of these proposed techniques

我的工作是在評估 各種這類的技術提案，

to see if they can work.

判斷它們能否奏效。

We could use plants to take CO2 out,

我們能用植物來除去二氧化碳，

and then store it in trees,

把二氧化碳儲存在樹木中、

in the soil, deep underground or in the oceans.

土壤中、地底深處，或海底深處。

We could build large machines, so-called artificial trees,

我們能建立大型機器， 所謂的人工樹木，

that will scrub CO2 from the air.

它們能把二氧化碳從空氣中清除。

For these ideas to be feasible,

若要讓這些點子變成可行的，

we need to understand whether they can be applied

我們得要了解它們是否能用

at a vast scale in a way that is safe, economic and socially acceptable.

安全、經濟，且被社會 接受的方式，做大範圍應用。

All of these ideas come with tradeoffs.

所有這些點子都有得失要權衡。

None of them are perfect,

沒有一個是完美的，

but many have potential.

但許多都有潛力。

It's unlikely that any one of them will solve it on its own.

不太可能只用一個點子就解決問題。

There is no silver bullet,

沒有銀子彈（無敵的殺手鐧），

but potentially together, they may form the silver buckshot

但若把它們一併使用， 可能可以形成銀獵鹿霰彈，

that we need to stop climate change in its tracks.

讓我們可以就地阻止氣候變遷。

I'm working independently on one particular idea

我自己在獨立進行一個特別的點子，

which uses natural gas to generate electricity

這個點子是用天然氣來發電，

in a way that takes carbon dioxide out of the air.

這個方式可以把 二氧化碳從空氣中除去。

Huh? How does that work?

啊？這是什麼原理？

So the Origen Power Process feeds natural gas into a fuel cell.

Origen Power 處理程序是 將天然氣送入燃料電池中。

About half the chemical energy is converted into electricity,

大約一半的化學能會被轉換成電力，

and the remainder into heat,

剩下的部分轉換成熱能，

which is used to break down limestone

熱能是要用來分解石灰石，

into lime and carbon dioxide.

將之變成石灰和二氧化碳。

Now at this point, you're probably thinking that I'm nuts.

在這個時點，你們可能認為我瘋了。

It's actually generating carbon dioxide.

它是在產生二氧化碳啊。

But the key point is, all of the carbon dioxide generated,

重點是，所有產生出來的二氧化碳，

both from the fuel cell and from the lime kiln, is pure,

包括來自燃料電池和石灰窯的 二氧化碳，都是純的，

and that's really important,

這點非常重要，

because it means you can either use that carbon dioxide

因為那意味著， 你可以用那些二氧化碳，

or you can store it away deep underground at low cost.

或是你可以用低成本 將它們儲存在地底深處。

And then the lime that you produce can be used in industrial processes,

而你產生的石灰就能被 用在工業生產過程中，

and in being used, it scrubs CO2 out of the air.

在使用的時候，它們就會把 空氣中的二氧化碳清除。

Overall, the process is carbon negative.

整體上，這個處理程序 產生的二氧化碳量是負值。

It removes carbon dioxide from the air.

意即它會把二氧化碳從空氣中除去。

If you normally generate electricity from natural gas,

一般來說如果你用天然氣來發電，

you emit about 400 grams of CO2 into the air

每產生一千瓦小時的電力， 就會釋放出大約 400 公克的

for every kilowatt-hour.

二氧化碳到空氣中。

With this process, that figure is minus 600.

有了這個處理程序， 那個數字就變成了 -600 公克。

At the moment, power generation is responsible

目前，所有的二氧化碳排放量

for about a quarter of all carbon dioxide emissions.

當中大約四分之一 是由發電所造成的。

Hypothetically, if you replaced all power generation with this process,

根據假設，如果把所有的 發電方式都換成這個處理程序，

then you would not only eliminate all of the emissions from power generation

那麼不但所有發電產生的 二氧化碳都會被除去，

but you would start removing emissions from other sectors as well,

還會開始除去其他部門 所排放的二氧化碳，

potentially cutting 60 percent of overall carbon emissions.

可能可以縮減整體碳排放的 60%。

You could even use the lime

你甚至可以使用石灰，

to add it directly to seawater to counteract ocean acidification,

把它直接加到海水中， 來對抗海水酸化，

one of the other issues that is caused by CO2 in the atmosphere.

這是大氣中的二氧化碳 會造成的另一個問題。

In fact, you get more bang for your buck.

事實上，這是物超所值的。

You absorb about twice as much carbon dioxide when you add it to seawater

比起把它用在工業上， 當你把它加到海水中時，

as when you use it industrially.

可以吸收兩倍的二氧化碳。

But this is where it gets really complicated.

但這就是複雜的地方了。

While counteracting ocean acidification is a good thing,

雖然對抗海水酸化是好事，

we don't fully understand what the environmental consequences are,

我們尚未完全了解這麼做 對於環境會造成什麼後果，

and so we need to assess whether this treatment

所以我們得要評估這項處理方式是否

is actually better than the disease that it is seeking to cure.

真的有比它所想要治療的疾病更好。

We need to put in place step-by-step governance

我們需要準備好 按步就班的實驗管理，

for experiments to assess this safely.

來安全地評估它。

And the scale:

還有規模：

to avoid dangerous climate change,

若要避免危險的氣候變遷，

we are going to need to remove trillions --

我們會需要從大氣中除去數兆──

and yes, that's trillions with a T --

是的，我說的是「兆」──

trillions of tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in the decades ahead.

數兆噸的二氧化碳， 且在接下來的數十年中要完成。

It will cost a few percent of GDP -- think defense-sized expenditure,

會需要花上幾個百分點的 GDP ──想想國防等級的花費、

lots of industrial activity

許多的工業活動，

and inevitably harmful side effects.

以及無可避免的有害副作用。

But if the scale seems enormous,

但，如果覺得這個規模似乎很巨大，

it is only because of the scale of the problem

那也是因為我們打算要解決的 問題本身的規模。

that we are seeking to solve.

It's enormous as well.

它的規模也是很巨大的。

We can no longer avoid these thorny issues.

我們無法再繼續避開這些棘手議題。

We face risks whichever way we turn:

不論我們轉向哪一邊， 都會面對風險：

a world changed by climate change

一個被氣候變遷改變的世界，

or a world changed by climate change and our efforts to counter climate change.

或是一個被氣候變遷改變的世界加上 我們為了反擊氣候變遷所做的努力。

Would that it were not so,

希望情況不是那樣，

but we can no longer afford to close our eyes, block our ears,

但我們沒有本錢再 閉上眼睛、關上耳朵，

and say la-la-la.

然後說啦啦啦（表示不想聽）。

We need to grow up and face the consequences of our actions.

我們得要長大，並面對 我們的行為造成的後果。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Does talk of curing climate change undermine the will to cut emissions?

談論消除氣候變遷是否 低估了想要縮減排放的意願？

This is a real concern,

這是真正該關心的事，

so we need to emphasize the paramount importance of reducing emissions

所以我們得要強調 排放減量的重要性有多高，

and how speculative these ideas are.

以及這些點子是多麼推測性的。

But having done so, we still need to examine them.

但這麼做了之後， 我們仍然得要檢驗它們。

Can we cure climate change?

我們能夠消除氣候變遷嗎？

I don't know, but we certainly can't if we don't try.

我不知道，但如果 我們不試肯定就不行。

We need ambition without arrogance.

我們需要有野心但不能自大。

We need the ambition to restore the atmosphere,

我們需要野心來恢復大氣，

to draw down carbon dioxide

減少二氧化碳，

back to a level that is compatible with a stable climate and healthy oceans.

減回到一個能配合 穩定氣候和健康海洋的量。

This will be an enormous undertaking.

這會是一項龐大的工作。

You could describe it as a cathedral project.

你們可以把它形容是 一個大教堂專案計畫。

Those involved at the outset

一開始就涉入的人，

may draft the plans and dig the foundations,

可以擬草圖、挖地基，

but they will not raise the spire to its full height.

但他們無法把尖塔建到最高。

That task, that privilege,

那項工作任務，那項特權，

belongs to our descendants.

屬於我們的後代子孫。

None of us will see that day, but we must start in the hope

我們都無法看見那一天， 但我們必須要帶著希望開始進行，

that future generations will be able to finish the job.

希望未來的世代能夠完成這項工作。

So, do you want to change the world?

所以，你們想要改變世界嗎？

I don't.

我不想。

I do not seek the change the world,

我尋求的不是改變世界，

but rather keep it as it's meant to be.

而是讓它保持它該有的樣子。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Chris Anderson: Thanks. I just want to ask you a couple of other questions.

克里斯安德森：謝謝。 我想要問你幾個其他的問題。

Tell us a bit more about this idea of putting lime in the ocean.

多告訴我們一點關於 將石灰放進海洋的這個點子。

I mean, on the face of it, it's pretty compelling --

我的意思是，乍聽之下， 它蠻引人入勝的──

anti-ocean acidification --

抗海洋酸化──

and it absorbs more CO2.

且它會吸收更多二氧化碳。

You talked about, we need to do an experiment on this.

你剛談到我們需要對此進行實驗。

What would a responsible experiment look like?

負責的實驗應該是什麼樣子的？

Tim Kruger: So I think you need to do a series of experiments,

提姆庫格：我想， 你需要做一系列的實驗，

but you need to do them just very small stage-by-stage.

但做法上需要以非常 細微的階段式進行。

In the same way, when you're trialing a new drug,

和試驗新藥物時用的方法相同，

you wouldn't just go into human trials straight off.

你不會直接去做人體實驗。

You would do a small experiment.

你會先做一些小實驗。

And so the first things to do are experiments entirely on land,

所以，最先要做的 是完全在陸地上的實驗，

in special containers, away from the environment.

在遠離環境的特殊容器中進行。

And then once you are confident that that can be done safely,

等到你有信心能夠安全進行，

you move to the next stage.

你再進入下一個階段。

If you're not confident, you don't.

如果你沒信心，就不要。

But step by step.

要一步一步來。

CA: And who would fund such experiments?

克里斯：誰會資助這樣的實驗？

Because they kind of impact the whole planet at some level.

因為在某種層面來說， 這些實驗是對整個地球有影響的。

Is that why nothing is happening on this?

這是不是它還沒有發生的原因？

TK: So I think you can do small-scale experiments in national waters,

提姆：我認為你可以在國家 水域內先做一些小規模的實驗，

and then it's probably the requirement of national funders to do that.

這可能會需要國家級的 資助者才能辦到。

But ultimately, if you wanted to counter ocean acidification in this way

但，最終，如果你想要 用這種方式對抗海洋酸化，

on a global scale,

要做到全球的規模，

you would need to do it in international waters,

你就會需要在國際水域上進行，

and then you would need to have an international community working on it.

那麼你就會需要 國際社會來協助進行。

CA: Even in national waters, you know, the ocean's all connected.

克里斯：在國際水域， 你知道的，海洋都是相連的。

That lime is going to get out there.

石灰會跑出去。

And people feel outraged about doing experiments on the planet,

人們對於對地球做實驗感到憤慨，

as we've heard.

我們聽過這樣的事。

How do you counter that?

你要如何對付那樣的問題？

TK: I think you touch on something which is really important.

提姆：我想，你提到了很重要的事。

It's about a social license to operate.

就是執行上的社會執照。

And I think it may be that it is impossible to do,

我想，也許不可能做到，

but we need to have the courage to try,

但我們得要有勇氣去嘗試，

to move this forward,

來把這件事向前推進，

to see what we can do,

看看我們能什麼，

and to engage openly.

並且公開進行。

And we need to engage with people in a transparent way.

我們需要用透明的方式讓人們參與。

We need to ask them beforehand.

我們需要事先詢問他們。

And I think if we ask them,

我想，如果我們詢問他們，

we have to be open to the possibility that the answer will come back,

我們就得要開放接受 有可能會得到這樣的答案：

"No, don't do it."

「不，不要做。」

CA: Thanks so much. That was really fascinating.

克里斯：非常謝謝。很棒的演說。

TK: Thank you. (Applause)

提姆：謝謝你。（掌聲）