A climate solution where all sides can win | Ted Halstead

譯者: Regina Chu 審譯者: Marssi Draw

I have a two-year-old daughter named Naya

我有個二歲的女兒叫娜亞，

who is under the mistaken impression

她誤以為

that this conference is named in honor of her father.

這場大會取這個名字 是為了向她的父親致敬。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Who am I to contradict my baby girl?

我是何方神聖， 膽敢駁斥我的寶貝女兒？

As many of you know, there's something about becoming a parent

你們很多人都了解，為人父母後，

that concentrates the mind on long-term problems like climate change.

才會全心關注 像氣候變遷這種長期的問題。

It was the birth of my daughter that inspired me

我就是因為女兒誕生，

才啟發我發起這個氣候組織，

to launch this climate organization,

in order to counteract the excessive polarization of this issue

來對抗這個在美國 已過度兩極化的問題，

in the United States,

and to find a conservative pathway forward.

並尋找一條能讓保守派向前的道路。

Yes, folks, a Republican climate solution is possible,

沒錯，鄉親父老，共和黨的 氣候變遷解方並非遙不可及，

and you know what?

而且你知道嗎？

It may even be better.

可能還比其它的更好！

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Let me try to prove that to you.

讓我證明給大家看。

What we really need is a killer app to climate policy.

對氣候政策， 我們真正需要的是殺手應用。

In the technology world, a killer app is an application so transformative

在科技界，殺手應用 是指改變力量超強的應用程式，

that it creates its own market,

能創造出自己的市場，

like Uber.

就像優步。

In the climate world,

在氣候變遷世界，

a killer app is a new solution so promising

殺手應用是一種 前景可期的新解方，

that it can break through the seemingly insurmountable

能突破幾乎無法克服的障礙，

barriers to progress.

因而進步。

These include the psychological barrier.

這包括心理障礙。

Climate advocates have long been encouraging their fellow citizens

倡導氣候變遷的人 長期以來一直鼓勵同胞

to make short-term sacrifices now

在當下做出短暫犧牲，

for benefits that accrue to other people

造福其它國家

in other countries 30 or 40 years in the future.

未來三、四十年的人民，

It just doesn't fly because it runs contrary to basic human nature.

這哪說得過去？ 因為這跟人的本性大相逕庭。

Next is the geopolitical barrier.

另外就是地緣政治障礙。

Under the current rules of global trade,

在現行的全球貿易規則下，

countries have a strong incentive to free ride off the emissions reductions

各國都有很強的動機要占便宜，

讓其它國家去減排放量，

of other nations,

instead of strengthening their own programs.

卻不加強自己的計畫。

This has been the curse

這是每一個國際氣候協定 都逃不掉的詛咒，

of every international climate negotiations, including Paris.

包括巴黎協議。

Finally, we have the partisan barrier.

最後，我們還有黨派障礙。

Even the most committed countries --

即使是最盡心盡意的國家──

Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada --

德國、英國、加拿大──

are nowhere near reducing emissions at the required scale and speed.

都無法依照規定的 規模和速度減少排放。

Not even close.

差的遠了。

And the partisan climate divide is far more acute

而黨派之間的氣候鴻溝

here in the United States.

在美國這裡更是有過之而無不及。

We are fundamentally stuck,

我們完全卡住了，

and that is why we need a killer app of climate policy

這就是為什麼我們需要 氣候政策的殺手應用

to break through each of these barriers.

來突破上述的障礙。

I'm convinced that the road to climate progress in the United States

我相信美國的氣候進步之路

runs through the Republican Party

必要貫穿共和黨

and the business community.

及商業界。

So in launching the Climate Leadership Council,

所以我發起氣候領導委員會，

I started by reaching out to a who's who of Republican elder statesmen

開始嘗試與共和黨的政治大老

and business leaders,

及商業領袖溝通，

including James Baker and George Schultz,

包括詹姆斯·貝克及喬治·舒茲，

the two most respected Republican elder statesmen in America;

這兩位倍受尊重的 美國共和黨政治大老；

Martin Feldstein and Greg Mankiw,

馬丁·費爾德斯坦及尼可拉斯·曼昆，

the two most respected conservative economists in the country;

這兩位在本國最受推崇的 保守派經濟學家；

and Henry Paulson and Rob Walton,

及亨利·鮑爾森和羅伯·沃爾頓，

two of the most successful and admired business leaders.

這兩位最成功最受景仰的商業領袖。

Together, we co-authored

我們一起合寫

"The Conservative Case For Carbon Dividends."

「保守派的碳利實例」。

This represents the first time

這是第一次

that Republican leaders put forth

由共和黨領袖提出

具體的市場經濟氣候方案。

a concrete market-based climate solution.

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Thank you.

謝謝！

(Applause)

（掌聲）

We presented our plan at the White House

我們在川普總統上任兩週後

two weeks after President Trump moved in.

在白宮呈獻此計劃。

Almost every leading editorial board in the country

幾乎所有美國主要的報章編輯委員會

has since endorsed our plan,

都背書支持我們的計劃，

and Fortune 100 companies from a wide range of industries

橫跨各界的財星百大企業

are now getting behind it.

也開始支持它。

So by now you're probably wondering,

所以此刻你大概在想，

what exactly is this plan?

到底這是什麼計劃？

Well, our carbon dividends solution is based on four pillars.

我們的碳利方法有四大支柱。

The first is a gradually rising carbon tax.

第一是逐步增加碳稅。

Although capitalism is a wonderful system,

雖然資本主義是很棒的系統，

like many operating systems, it's prone to bugs,

但它就像很多作業系統一樣， 很容易出現錯誤，

which, in this case, are called "market failures."

在我們這個情況 就叫作「市場失靈」。

By far the largest is that market prices fail to take

到目前為止最大的失靈， 就是市場價格不能

social and environmental costs into account.

將社會及環境成本加進來。

That means every market transaction is based on incorrect information.

這意味著每一筆市場交易 都是基於錯誤的資訊。

This fundamental bug of capitalism, more than any other single factor,

資本主義這項根本錯誤， 超過其它任何因子，

is to blame for our climate predicament.

要為我們的氣候困境 付上最大的責任。

Now in theory, this should be an easy problem to fix.

理論上，這應是很容易解決的問題。

Economists agree

經濟學家同意

that the best solution is to put a price on the carbon content of fossil fuels,

最好的解方就是 把石化燃料裡的碳標上價錢，

otherwise known as a carbon tax.

也就是所謂的碳稅。

This would discourage carbon emissions

這樣就會鼓勵減少

in every single economic transaction,

在每年每天，每一筆 經濟交易中的碳排放。

every day of the year.

However, a carbon tax by itself has proven to be unpopular

然而，碳稅本身已證明不受歡迎，

and a political dead end.

在政治面也走到死胡同。

The answer is to return all the money raised

解答就是把所有徵收到的錢

directly to citizens,

直接回饋給老百姓，

in the form of equal monthly dividends.

以每月固定的紅利形式。

This would transform an unpopular carbon tax

這樣會把不受歡迎的碳稅

into a popular and populist solution,

變成受歡迎、帶平民主義 色彩的解決方案，

and it would also solve

而且這也能解決

the underlying psychological barrier that we discussed,

我們剛剛討論過的潛在心理障礙，

by giving everyone a concrete benefit in the here and now.

因為我們讓每一個人 都能在當下拿到具體的好處。

And these benefits would be significant.

這些好處很重要。

Assuming a carbon tax rate that starts at 40 dollars per ton,

假設碳稅的起價是每噸四十美元，

a family of four would receive 2,000 dollars per year

一開始一個四口之家 每年就會收到兩千美元。

from the get-go.

According to the US Treasury Department,

根據美國財務部的資料，

the bottom 70 percent of Americans would receive more in dividends

收入在後 70% 的美國人 收到的紅利，

than they would pay in increased energy prices.

會比他們付的上漲能源價格還多。

That means 223 million Americans would win economically

這意味著二億二千三百萬美國人，

會因為解決氣候變遷問題 而贏得經濟上的好處。

from solving climate change.

And that --

而且這──

(Applause)

（掌聲）

is revolutionary,

這是很大的變革，

and could fundamentally alter climate politics.

還會從根本改變氣候政策。

But there's another revolutionary element here.

但是這裡還有另一項變革。

The amount of the dividend would grow

紅利金額

會隨著碳稅率增加而成長。

as the carbon tax rate increases.

The more we protect our climate,

我們愈保護氣候，

the more our citizens benefit.

老百姓就得到愈多好處。

This creates a positive feedback loop,

這會產生正向回饋，

which is crucial,

而這很重要，

because the only way we will reach our long-term emission-reduction goals

因為我們要達到排放減量 長期目標的唯一方法，

is if the carbon tax rate goes up every year.

就是要每年增加碳稅率。

The third pillar of our program is eliminating regulations

這個計劃的第三個支柱就是廢除

that are no longer needed

不合時宜的法規，

once a carbon dividends plan is enacted.

在碳紅利開始實施之後。

This is a key selling point to Republicans and business leaders.

這對共和黨及商業領袖是一大賣點。

So why should we trade

我們為什麼要拿

climate regulations for a price on carbon?

氣候法規跟碳的價錢交換呢？

Well, let me show you.

嗯，給大家看一下。

Our plan would achieve nearly twice the emissions reductions

我們的計劃有不但可能 讓排放減量目標，

of all Obama-era climate regulations combined,

比歐巴馬時代全部的 氣候法規所達成的高一倍，

and nearly three times the new baseline

在川普總統廢止所有氣候法規後，

after President Trump repeals all of those regulations.

還會高出幾乎多兩倍的目標。

That assumes a carbon tax starting at 40 dollars per ton,

那假設碳稅起價為每噸四十美元，

which translates into roughly an extra 36 cents per gallon of gas.

換算出來每加侖汽油 大約會增收 36 美分。

Our plan by itself

我們的計劃本身

would meet the high end of America's commitment

就會達到美國在巴黎氣候協議

under the Paris Climate Agreement,

承諾的減量最大值，

and as you can see,

就像你們看到的，

the emissions reductions would continue over time.

排放減量會隨著時間持續下去。

This illustrates the power of a conservative climate solution

這說明了保守派氣候解方的力量，

based on free markets and limited government.

根據自由市場和有限政府的理念。

We would end up with less regulation

我們有可能會有較少的法規，

and far less pollution at the same time,

同時卻產生更少的汙染，

while helping working-class Americans get ahead.

也可以幫助美國勞工階級成功。

Doesn't that sound like something we could all support?

這難道不是我們都會支持的嗎？

(Applause)

（掌聲）

The fourth and final pillar of our program is a new climate domino effect,

本計劃第四項也是最後一個支柱， 就是嶄新的氣候骨牌效應，

based on border carbon adjustments.

根據邊境調整措施。

Now that may sound complicated,

這聽起來好像很複雜，

but it, too, is revolutionary,

但是這其實也很革新，

because it provides us a whole new strategy

因為這提供我們全新的策略

to reach a global price on carbon,

找出碳的全球定價，

which is ultimately what we need.

那正是我們的終極目標。

Let me show you an example.

請大家看一個例子。

Suppose Country A adopts a carbon dividends plan,

假設甲國採取了碳紅利計畫，

and Country B does not.

但是乙國沒有。

Well, to level the playing field

那麼，為了使兩邊交易公平，

and protect the competitiveness of its industries,

並保護各自的工業競爭力，

Country A would tax imports from Country B

甲國會對乙國

based on their carbon content.

按照物品碳含量課進口稅。

Fair enough.

很公平。

But here's where it gets really interesting,

但這就是事情變得有意思的地方。

because the money raised at the border would increase the dividends

因為在邊境收到的錢

會增加甲國老百姓得到的紅利。

going to the citizens of Country A.

Well, how long do you think it would take the public in Country B to realize

那麼，你猜乙國百姓 要多久以後才會發現

that that money should be going to them,

那筆錢其實應該歸給他們，

and to push for a carbon dividends plan in their own land?

然後要求自己的政府 也實施碳紅利計畫？

Add a few more countries,

再多加幾個國家，

and we get a new climate domino effect.

我們就得到新的氣候骨牌效應。

Once one major country or region adopts carbon dividends

一旦某強國或地區採取碳紅利，

with border carbon adjustments,

再加上邊境調整措施，

other countries are compelled to follow suit.

別的國家就必須跟著做。

One by one the dominoes fall.

骨牌一個接一個倒下。

And this domino effect could start anywhere.

這種骨牌效應可以從任何地方開始。

My preference, strongly, is the United States,

我的首選，當然是美國，

but it could also start in the United Kingdom,

但是也可以從英國，

in Germany or another European country,

從德國或其他歐洲國家，

or even in China.

甚至從中國開始。

Let's take China as an example.

就以中國為例。

China is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions,

中國承諾要減少 溫室效應氣體的排放量，

but what its leaders care even more about

但是該國的領導者更在乎

is transitioning their economy to consumer-led economic development.

要將經濟轉型成 消費者導向的經濟發展。

Well, nothing could do more to hasten that transition

沒有比這個更能加速轉型，

than giving every Chinese citizen a monthly dividend.

就是發給每一位中國百姓 一份月付型紅利。

In fact, this is the only policy solution

事實上，只有這個政策解決方案，

that would enable China to meet its environmental and economic goals

能讓中國同時達到環境保護 及經濟發展的雙重目標。

at the same time.

That's why this is the killer app of climate policy,

那也就是為什麼這就是 氣候政策的殺手應用，

because it would enable us to overcome

因為這能讓我們克服

each of the barriers we discussed earlier:

我們剛剛談過的每一道障礙：

the psychological barrier, the partisan barrier,

心理障礙、政黨障礙，

and, as we've just seen, the geopolitical barrier.

及我們剛剛看到的地緣政治障礙。

All we need is a country to lead the way.

我們所需的只是一個 率先起步的國家。

And one method of finding what you're looking for

找到我們在尋找的東西的方法

is to take out an ad.

就是來一段廣告。

So let's read this one together.

我們一起讀一下這個。

Wanted: country to pioneer carbon dividends plan.

徵求啟示：誠徵願意率先實施 碳紅利計畫的國家。

Cost to country: zero.

費用：零。

Starting date: as soon as possible.

開始日期：愈快愈好。

Advantages: most effective climate solution,

優勢：最有效的氣候解決方案，

popular and populist,

受歡迎且大眾取向，

pro-growth and pro-business,

親成長派，親商業派，

shrinks government and helps the working class.

縮小政府，並幫助勞工階級。

Additional compensation: gratitude of current and future generations,

附加報酬：受現在及未來世代的感謝，

including my daughter.

包括我的女兒。

Thank you.

謝謝！

(Applause)

（掌聲）

Chris Anderson: Just one question for you, Ted.

克理斯安德森：泰德， 我只有一個問題要問你。

I'm actually not sure

我其實沒什麼印象

I've seen a conservative get a standing O at TED before that.

曾見過什麼保守派人士 在 TED 大會受起立致敬。

That's pretty cool.

好酷！

The logic seems really powerful,

這個邏輯似乎真的很強，

but some people you talk to in politics

但是某些曾與你談過的政治人物

say it's hard to imagine this still getting through Congress.

說這很難通過議院支持。

How are you feeling about momentum behind this?

你對這背後的氣勢感覺如何？

Ted Halstead: So I understand that many are very pessimistic

泰德浩思得：我了解很多人對於

about what's happening in the United States with President Trump.

美國現在在川普總統之下的 情勢非常悲觀。

I'm less pessimistic; here's why.

我稍微好一點；理由是：

The actions of this White House, the early actions on climate,

白宮的動作， 在氣候方面早期的動作，

are just the first move in a complex game of climate chess.

只是這場複雜氣候棋局的頭先幾步。

So far it's been a repeal-only strategy;

到目前為止都還停留在 「要廢除」這個策略；

the pressure is going to mount for a replacement program,

壓力會施加在取而代之的計畫上，

which is where we come in.

這也就是我們能出手的地方。

And there are three reasons why, which I'll go through real quickly.

有三大理由，我快快解釋一下。

第一，商業界在根本上

One, the business community is fundamentally parting ways

與白宮的氣候變遷政策大相逕庭。

with the White House on climate change.

In fact, we're finding

事實上，我們發現

a number of Fortune 100 companies supporting our program.

不少財星百大公司支持我們的計畫。

Within two months, we're going to be announcing

我們將在兩個月內宣布

some really surprising names coming out in favor of this program.

會讓人大吃一驚的支持者名單。

Two, there is no issue in American politics

第二，美國政治上 只有氣候變遷這個議題

where there's a more fundamental gap between the Republican base

能在共和黨基層

and the Republican leadership than climate change.

及共和黨領導間 造成這麼大的根本差距。

And three, thinking of this analogy of chess,

第三，就用棋局對弈來比擬，

the big decision up ahead is: Does the administration stay in Paris?

橫在我們面前的重大決定是： 這個政府會不會繼續參與巴黎協議？

Well, let's pan it out both ways.

我們來看一下正反兩面。

If it stays in Paris, as many are pushing for in the administration,

如果維持巴黎協定， 就像很多人當下正在政府裡推動的，

well then that begs a question: What's the plan?

那麼就要問一個問題： 你有什麼計畫？

We have the plan.

我們有計畫。

But if they don't stay in Paris,

但是如果他們退出巴黎，

the international pressure will be overwhelming.

國際的壓力會排山倒海而來。

Our Secretary of State will be asking other countries for NATO contributions,

我們的國務卿會要求 其它北約國家達成財務基準，

and they'll be saying, "No, give us our Paris commitment.

他們就會回說： 「不，給我巴黎承諾。

Come through on your commitments, we'll come through on ours."

履行你的承諾， 我們就會做我們該做的。」

所以，國際間、商業界 甚至共和黨基層

So, international, business and even the Republican base

will all be calling for a Republican replacement plan.

都在要求共和黨提出替代方案。

And, hopefully, we've provided one.

所以，希望我們這個就是解答。

CA: Thank you so much, Ted.

克：非常感謝你，泰德。

TH: Thank you, Chris.

泰：謝謝你，克理斯。

(Applause)

（掌聲）