|
After Copenhagen: Hope for the future 哥本哈根后：未来的希望
CNN-- The UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen last December was widely portrayed as a failure. But just how bad was the result? And is there cause for optimism? CNN spoke to climate change expert Mark Lynas who was in the room with world leaders as key decisions were debated. CNN -- 上月在哥本哈根举行的联合国气候变化大会被广泛描述成一次失败。但是结果究竟有多糟？会有乐观的方面吗？CNN对话在各国元首们讨论关键决策时处于同一房间的气候变化专家Mark Lynas
CNN: Would you describe the Copenhagen talks as 'a disaster'? And if so, how serious is this failure? CNN: 你想说哥本哈根会议是一次彻底的失败？如果是这样的话，这次失败有多严重呢？
Mark Lynas: I would describe them as a near disaster in the sense the worst outcome would have been no agreement at all, which was very nearly the situation, right up until the end... Overall, it isn't good, but it isn't the absolute end point either. Mark Lynas: 就没有达成任何协议的最坏结果而言，我会说这会议接近彻底失败，直至会议结束也非常接近于此。总体而言会议不怎么样，但会议也不是最后的终点。
CNN: China has been widely criticized for being un-cooperative. Do you think world leaders can move forward with a deal, despite China's attitude? CNN: 中国不合作的态度被广泛指责。你认为各国领导人能在无视中国态度情况下，更进一步推出协议吗？
Mark Lynas: China isn't the new Saudi Arabia, who wanted to block an agreement under all circumstances. The point is that the Chinese need to feel like they are under pressure and they need to feel that they will have to peak their emissions much earlier than they want to. I don't think that makes them unique, it just puts them in a similar situation to most other countries, including the United States. Mark Lynas: 中国不是在任何情况下都想阻挡协议新版沙特。关键是中国人需要感到他们有压力，并且他们不得不比他们所希望的时间更早地将排放量达到峰值。我不认为这会使他们独一无二，只是把他们置于包括美国在内的大多数国家相似的情况。
It was mainly China that tried to block the agreement in the form of the Copenhagen Accord, and I think people need to understand that so that [the Chinese] can be put under pressure in the months and years ahead. 主要是中国试图阻挡以哥本哈根协议（？？？）形式的协议，我想大家应该知道这些，这样中国就能在数月甚至数年前就被施加压力。
But I think the real point is this: over the last 15 years it has always been the Annex 1 countries, the rich countries, that have been the bad guys blocking agreements; countries like the United States, Australia, Canada and Japan have all been seen as obstacles to progress. 可我认为真正的问题是：在过去的15年中中国总是那个“+1”的国家（无须承担责任），而富国成了阻挡协议的坏蛋，像美国，澳大利亚，加拿大和日本总被看作是阻挡进步。
But at Copenhagen it was a different situation, where the rest of the world was prepared to see serious long-term mitigation targets in any agreement and this was blocked by a country from the developing world. People need to recognize that the geopolitical realities have changed and campaigns need to change accordingly. 但是在哥本哈根，情况就不同了。在哥本哈根，世界上其他国家准备在任何协议上达成严格的长期减排目标，这却被来自发展中国家阵营的一个国家（中国）阻止了。人们需要认识到世界现实政治版图已经改变，相应的活动也需要改变。
CNN: How optimistic are you that global leaders will find their way to a multilateral deal before its too late? CNN: 你对全球领导人在一切都太晚之前能找到一种达成多边协议的方式有多乐观？
Mark Lynas: I don't think it's totally disastrous that we don't have an agreement now. The big emitting countries need to go back and do some thinking about all this, but they can't put off an agreement indefinitely. Mark Lynas: 我不认为我们目前没有一个协议是完全灾难性的。排放大国需要回头重新考虑一下这一切，但是他们不能无限期地推迟决议。
We also have to realize that this argument that because the rich countries have polluted, so the poor have a right to pollute, is flawed both morally and ecologically. This is the argument that has underlain everything so far, and that will need to change. If that's to happen it's going to mean a big change in how climate change politics is conceptualized and everyone from governments to NGOs to media organization have to understand this. 我们也认识到这个协议在道德上和生态上是不完美的：不能因为发达国家排放过就让发展中国家有权排放。这是目前为止使所有事都变得不重要的争论，这一点需要改变。如果那发生的话，那就意味着在（气候变化引起的政治博弈将如何被概念化）这一问题上将会发生巨大变化。而从政府官员到非盈利组织的工作人员再到媒体都要理解这一点。（？？？）
CNN: What would you do if you were President of the USA? CNN：如果你是美国总统你会怎么做？
Mark Lynas: Obama is a smarter person than I am and I'm very reluctant to second guess him or make suggestions. Like all leaders he has to make a compromise with domestic pressures, which for him are largely very negative, certainly from the Republican right and make it almost impossible to get an international treaty through the Senate, particularly something to do with climate change. He has to balance that with his international responsibilities to keep the planet habitable. Mark Lynas：奥巴马比我聪明，我十分不想去预测他（要做什么）或者提出建议。像所有领导人一样，奥巴马也要为国内压力作出对他来说十分消极的妥协，当然这些压力在自于共和党并使得国际条约、特别是气候变化方面的条约几乎不可能在国会获得通过。奥巴马必须平衡（共和党的压力）与他的国际义务来使地球维持可居住的环境。 But I think he went to Copenhagen with a reasonable offer. OK, so it's only four percent below 1990 levels but you've got to deal with where we are now... The point is that all countries have to move towards peaking their emissions and the U.S. is at the table to do that and we need other countries to behave likewise. 但是我认为他是带着一个合理的提议去哥本哈根的。好吧，（这目标）的确比1990年只低了4个百分点，可是你得知道我们现在的处境。关键是要所有国家都向着减少排放方向努力，美国正在谈判桌上（努力减少排放），我们也需要其他国家同样如此。
------------------------------------------------------------------弱小的分割线---------------------------------------------------- 后来的实在翻不下去，感觉和我国没什么关系了。。。 CNN: What do you think will happen now?
Mark Lynas: We have to think about what all this means and understand why progress has been so agonizingly slow. We need to work on some of the positive outcomes. Personally, I will continue to work with the Maldives to show that going carbon neutral and getting emissions down is not a huge sacrifice, but actually something that makes your life better, and puts you at the forefront with the economic winners.
We need to try and change the language used to discuss climate change, from all about burden sharing, to opportunity sharing. That's a big mental shift, it's a big political shift and it's a big economic shift.
I also think it's important to keep developing countries and small island states as low carbon emitters, and make sure that the low-emission path is one that brings them prosperity. We have all the technology to do that, but we don't have the political framework yet. So, we will need the right kind of funding and political will to take mitigation action.
What do you think? Have your say in the Sound off box at the bottom of the page.
CNN: What action would you like to see ordinary concerned citizens take?
Mark Lynas: It's a mixture of things. I think as individuals we have to be a bit less naive. It's really much more important what your electricity company does with its investments, than whether we all change our light bulbs or turn our heating down. This is a problem that will be solved by very large companies and countries.
The hippy option of dropping out and having a different lifestyle is largely irrelevant. I want to see proper, free market-based solutions and I don't see any reason why they don't exist now.
One of the reasons denial is so prevalent is that dealing with climate change is seen as a big government, taxation issue, so those on the right have nowhere to go but be in denial about the problem as a whole. I'd like to see a shift there, leaving the true Flat Earthers isolated by options that are much more market-based. Now, obviously the campaigning left will go crazy about that, but I don't mind. It's important that the debate shifts.
CNN: Do you think emissions can be reduced enough to mitigate the worst effects of climate change without a global deal?
Mark Lynas: I think it's unlikely we can solve this without a multilateral agreement... It is still cheaper and will probably remain cheaper to manufacture exports with coal than with renewables or nuclear or another cleaner option. So we do need an international agreement that agrees a price on carbon to shift production away from those fuels.
Having countries that continue to use huge amounts of carbon to produce things cheaply and undercut their competitors would be a real problem. It is already an issue in the U.S., people say, 'If China isn't moving why should we?' You also get these kind of arguments in Europe. So I think we need a political mechanism that ensures the whole world is working together... we need a new game in town.
CNN: How optimistic are you we can mitigate the worst impacts of climate change?
Mark Lynas: I don't see why not. I think climate change is one of the easier ecological problems we've got to address. Tackling biodiversity loss is going to be much more difficult. Climate change should respond to a techno fix approach -- we just need to substitute our energy sources. But how are we going to save the tiger? Or the polar bears and the millions of other species under threat. I can't really see a market-based solution to that, or even a technology-based solution at the moment.
There are all these problems waiting in the wings. Climate change is probably the most important and the most urgent... but I don't see why the energy system will be so difficult to change, particularly as we have decades to do it.
If you think how different the world is today from how it was in 1950, what will it look like in 2050? Almost all the industrial plants that exist will have been retired and replaced by then. So long as we have the politics in place to ensure no new carbon-intensive plants are built, we can get there.
CNN: What gives you optimism?
Mark Lynas: I just don't see any particular reason why we shouldn't solve this problem. Given that carbon is not necessary for development. You don't need to burn coal to be prosperous, you don't even need to bun oil for transport, and there is an alternative for almost everything people want and value in their lives that is currently provided by a fossil fuel, perhaps with the exception of aviation...
The politics look so difficult at the moment because the interests of different countries aren't really aligned, but that's a job for political leaders. It's been rather slow going, you know two steps forward, one step backwards, or in the last couple of years, two steps backwards one step forward. We do have to recognize that lack of progress. But political leaders are engaged in this and I can't see how it will just be dropped.
Plus, the climate will keep on changing, whether it's global average temperatures or extreme weather events, so we are going to have solve it, even if we have to solve it very hurriedly and very expensively, we will have to do it. Simple as that.
原文地址：http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/science/01/04/climate.mark.lynas/index.html | 
狗仔卡
发表于 2010-1-9 13:40
提升卡
变色卡
抢沙发
千斤顶
显身卡
楼主
