核能是最安全、最清潔的能源形式之一，但對(duì)大多數(shù)人來說，可能并不是這樣。這是為什么？伊莎貝拉·博梅克（Isabelle Boemeke）是世界上第一位核能影響者，也是社交媒體人物伊索多普（Isodop）的創(chuàng)造者，她巧妙地揭穿了對(duì)核能的主要反對(duì)意見，并解釋了她對(duì)人們進(jìn)行清潔能源教育的非傳統(tǒng)方式。

My life completely changed with one tweet.?This was back in 2015?when Twitter was mostly a place we went to see what Kanye was mad about.?But then I saw it.?A tweet by a scientist I deeply admire,?Dr. Carolyn Porco.?Wait, I thought nuclear energy was bad.?Yet here is a scientist and a TED speaker?making it sound good.?It sent me on a journey,?I spent years reading papers, talking to scientists,?and I always asked them the same question:?What do you think about nuclear power??Their responses were shockingly similar.?It's good.?We need it.?People hate it.

我的生活因?yàn)橐粭l推特 而徹底改變。?這事要追溯到 2015 年。?當(dāng)時(shí)，我們?yōu)g覽 Twitter 就是去看看 坎爺 (Kanye West) 又在發(fā)什么瘋。?然后，我看到了那條推特。?發(fā)這條推特的是 我非常敬仰的一名科學(xué)家，?卡羅琳·波爾科 (Carolyn Porco) 博士。?不是，我當(dāng)時(shí)以為 核能是不好的。?但是，身為科學(xué)家 和 TED 講者的卡羅琳?卻在說核能的好處。?由此開啟了我?閱讀相關(guān)論文 和與科學(xué)家對(duì)話的旅程。?對(duì)話中，我總會(huì)問的 一個(gè)問題就是：?你是怎么看核能的？?而他們的回應(yīng) 也總是驚人地相似。?核能很好。?我們需要它。?但大眾卻討厭它。

In the last seven years,?I've seen climate change go from being a scary thing of the future?to being a scary thing of the present.?My wake-up call came after seeing the fires ravage the world in California,?in Australia?and in my home country of Brazil.?I decided I wanted to turn my growing sense of anger and despair?into something helpful and productive.

在過去的 7 年里，?我親眼目睹了氣候變化 這件可怕的事?從遠(yuǎn)在天邊 變得近在眼前。?那敲醒我的當(dāng)頭一棒 就是肆虐全球的山火，?加利佛尼亞州、澳大利亞，?以及我的家鄉(xiāng)巴西 都無一幸免。?我決定要將自己 日益積攢的憤怒和絕望?轉(zhuǎn)化為一點(diǎn)實(shí)用 和高效的東西。

So I had an unusual idea:?I should be a nuclear energy influencer.I wanted to make nuclear energy cool.

于是乎我有了一個(gè) 不尋常的想法：?我應(yīng)該成為一個(gè) 推廣核能的網(wǎng)紅。?我想讓核能看起來很酷。

Inspired by internet culture,?I created a digital version of me and called her Isodope.

我在互聯(lián)網(wǎng)文化的影響之下，?創(chuàng)建了一個(gè)數(shù)字身份， 叫 Isodope。

She's sassy,?a little weird,?but she always tells the truth.?And here, you can see her in action.

她自信中帶著點(diǎn)無理，?還有點(diǎn)怪異，?但她總是講真話。?下面就讓我們看看 她的表演。

(Video) Hey, guys, a lot of you asked about my make-up routine.The most important thing is to wash your face really well,because we want those pores as clean as we want our electricity.?And the best way to get that is to use this cleanser called --?stop shutting down nuclear plants, for Christ's sake.?It's carbon-free, emission-free, pollution-free electricity.?Then I use this plant-based serum called --?when a nuclear plant is shut down, it is replaced by fossil fuels.?That's bad.

（視頻）嗨，大家好， 很多人想知道我的化妝步驟。?最重要的就是 臉一定要洗干凈，?因?yàn)槲覀円_保毛孔 和我們的電力一樣清潔。而法寶就是 使用這款潔面產(chǎn)品，?叫做“幫幫忙吧， 不要再關(guān)停核電廠了”。?其產(chǎn)出的可是零碳排、 零排污、零污染的“清潔”電能。?潔面后，我用的是這款 純植物提取精華，?叫做“核電廠（詞同‘植物’）關(guān)閉后， 取而代之的是化石燃料。?這很糟糕?！?/span>

Isodope is like a dealer of good memes.?When I say meme, you probably think of something like this.

Isodope 就像是一個(gè) 網(wǎng)絡(luò)梗圖經(jīng)銷商。?當(dāng)我說道網(wǎng)絡(luò)梗圖時(shí)， 你想到的可能是這個(gè)。

What I mean by it is a fixed belief or idea, good or bad,?that spreads from person to person and defines how we see the world.?For example,?people should have equal rights.?Birds aren't real.?It's a thing.

而我所指的是 那些在人群中傳播，并塑造我們對(duì)世界看法的?既定觀念和想法（不論好壞）。?比如，人們應(yīng)當(dāng)擁有 平等的權(quán)利。?鳥類并不真實(shí)存在。?這個(gè)說法已經(jīng)流行開了。

Nuclear energy is bad.

核能不好。

When it comes to nuclear power,?the world has been sold a bad meme.?An outdated one.?Let's go back in time.?It all started with the anti-nuclear movement of the 1970s.?The movement was driven in large part?by an understandable fear of nuclear weapons.?And I get it.?It must have been terrifying to grow up in the '50s and '60s?fearing a nuclear attack.?But here's the problem.?Their logic was: nuclear bombs are bad,?therefore nuclear energy is bad.?Which, if you think about it, is like saying: the electric chair is bad,?therefore electricity is bad.?The case against nuclear power was never based on science,?but the anti-nuclear meme was very catchy.?In the decades that followed,aspiring engineers didn't choose nuclear engineering.?Politicians got points for closing nuclear plants,?even though it always led to higher carbon emissions.?The meme even snuck into people's homes,?every Sunday night at eight, without them knowing.

而在核能上，?整個(gè)世界都受到了 一個(gè)負(fù)面熱梗的影響。?還是一個(gè) 已經(jīng)過時(shí)的梗。?讓我們來回顧一下。?一切都始于 1970 年代的反核運(yùn)動(dòng)。?推動(dòng)這一運(yùn)動(dòng)的 一大因素是?人們對(duì)于核武器的 合理的恐懼。?這我能理解。?成長于五六十年代 一定是一種可怕的經(jīng)歷，?時(shí)時(shí)擔(dān)心遭到核武器攻擊。?但問題就在于，?他們的邏輯是： 既然核武器是壞的，?那么核能就不會(huì)好。?你仔細(xì)想想，這就好比說： 電椅是壞的，?所以電也是壞的。?對(duì)核能的針對(duì) 從來不是基于科學(xué)，但是反核相關(guān)的梗 倒是很引人注目。?在隨后的幾十年里，?多少滿懷抱負(fù)的工程師 因此沒有選擇核工程。?即使關(guān)停核電站 一定會(huì)導(dǎo)致碳排的增加，?但政客依然會(huì)因此 而獲得政治加分。?而關(guān)于反核的梗 甚至在不知不覺中，?于每周日晚八點(diǎn) 溜進(jìn)了人們的家中。

I wish Homer had worked at a coal plant.

我真希望荷馬 是在一家火電廠工作。

In the last 10 years,?we have spent trillions of dollars on renewables,?yet we only get eight percent of our electricity from wind and solar.?Now, don't get me wrong, I love renewables,?but to me, it's clear that we need more.?We need a source of energy that's clean?and works 24/7 to complement them.?And it's been sitting right in front of us this whole time,?but we have ignored itbecause we're too blinded by the meme.

在過去的十年中，?我們?cè)诳稍偕茉瓷?花費(fèi)了數(shù)千億，?但卻只有 8% 的電能 來自于風(fēng)能和太陽能。?大家別誤會(huì)， 我愛可再生能源，但在我看來，它無法滿足 我們的需求。?我們需要一種?清潔、全天候不間斷的能源 來與可再生能源互補(bǔ)。?這種能源一直都在 我們眼前，?但我們卻一直視而不見，?因?yàn)槲覀儽?各種爛梗蒙蔽了雙眼。

Now most people today aren't exactly anti-nuclear?as much as they’re “meh.”?Not passionately against it, but they've heard of Chernobyl.?They've seen images of leaking green barrels.?They have a vague feeling it's bad.?And remember, that's where I used to be.?Until I saw this chart.?The only thing you need to take away from this chart?is that nuclear power has the lowest life cycle emissions?of all energy sources,?producing only three tons of CO2 per gigawatt hour of electricity.?And I could keep talking like this all day long, but let's be real,?this is not changing minds on social media.?So I do things a little bit differently.

如今的人對(duì)待核能的態(tài)度 并不是反對(duì)，?而是漠然。?他們并非旗幟鮮明地反對(duì)， 但也都聽說過切爾諾貝利核事故。?他們看過正在泄漏的 綠色油桶的圖片。?他們隱約感覺這東西不好。?而我曾經(jīng)也是他們中的一員。?直到我看到了這張圖。?看完這張圖 你只需要記住一點(diǎn)，?即在所有的能源中， 核能的生命周期碳排?是最低的。?產(chǎn)生一千兆瓦時(shí)的電能 僅排放 3 噸二氧化碳。?這么講我能講一天， 但說實(shí)話，?這改變不了社交媒體上 人們的想法。?所以我另辟蹊徑。

(Video) The reality is that nuclear is one of the safest forms of energy.?The problem is that nuclear accidents are dramatic.While fossil fuel damage is boring.?I'm literally falling asleep talking about it.?Recent studies say that 8.7 million people die from burning them every year.?This would be like having 5.8 Chernobyls a day.?I'm just a humble influencer,?but I think this means fossil fuels are worse.

（視頻）事實(shí)上，核能 是最安全的能源之一。?而問題在于， 核能事故非常戲劇化，?化石燃料帶來的傷害 就要無聊得多。?講著講著 我都要睡著了。?最新研究顯示，燃燒化石燃料 每年導(dǎo)致 870 萬人死亡。?這相當(dāng)于每天發(fā)生 5.8 個(gè)切爾諾貝利事故。?雖然我只是 一個(gè)小小的網(wǎng)紅，?但我覺得這說明了 化石燃料要更糟糕。

Most people have a feeling airplanes are more dangerous than cars?because when a plane crashes, it makes the headlines.?It's memorable.?Of course, we know the opposite is true.?Planes are significantly safer than cars,?just like nuclear power is significantly safer than fossil fuels.

大多數(shù)人感覺 飛機(jī)比汽車更危險(xiǎn)，?因?yàn)轱w機(jī)墜毀 是要上頭條的，更容易讓人記住。?顯然，我們知道 飛機(jī)要更安全。?飛機(jī)的安全系數(shù) 要遠(yuǎn)高于汽車。?同理，核能也要比 化石燃料安全得多。

In this next video, Isodope will address the idea?that we don't know what to do with nuclear waste.

下面這個(gè)視頻里， Isodope 針對(duì)回應(yīng)的是?我們不知道如何處理 核廢料的這一觀點(diǎn)。

(Video) I'm sure you don't know what to do with it,?but there are people who spent decades studying this issue.?They're called scientists.?Finland is almost done building?the world's first nuclear waste repository.?They're storing it deep underground in geologically stable locations.?Sweden is about to do the same.?I know you're worried about what may happen 19,000 years from now, but ...

（視頻）你當(dāng)然不知道 該怎么處理核廢料，?但花費(fèi)數(shù)十年從事 該領(lǐng)域研究的大有人在。?他們叫做科學(xué)家。?芬蘭已經(jīng)快要建成?世界上第一個(gè) 核廢料處置庫。?它們被儲(chǔ)藏在地下深處 地質(zhì)結(jié)構(gòu)穩(wěn)定的部位。?瑞典也將緊隨 芬蘭的腳步。?我知道，你可能在擔(dān)心 19,000 年后會(huì)發(fā)生什么，但……

Again, just a humble influencer,?but we might not make it that far if we keep burning fossil fuels.

還是那句話， 我只是個(gè)小小的網(wǎng)紅，?但接著燒化石燃料的話， 我們可能都活不了這么久。

By the way, most think nuclear energy waste looks like this.?It actually looks like this.?Fully contained in concrete casks that are so good at blocking radiation?I might do a photo shoot there.

順嘴一說，大多數(shù)人認(rèn)為 核廢料長這樣。?但它實(shí)際上長這樣。?核廢料被完全包裹在 混凝土制成的桶中，?這些桶能夠很好的阻斷輻射， 所以我才能在那里拍照。

Now, a more modern objection to nuclear power?is that it's too slow.?It takes too long to build.?Well, I'm sure Isodope has something to say about that.

反對(duì)核能的一個(gè) 更新潮的理由是?它太慢了。?修建核電廠太耗時(shí)。我覺得 Isodope 關(guān)于這點(diǎn) 一定也有話要說。

(Video) (Isodope claps)?Finally, an argument that isn't older than me.?Unfortunately, it still sucks.?In the '70s, France built 45 reactors in 15 years.?More recently, Japan, China and Korea have built reactors in six years or less.?So this means BTS is blow-drying their hair with clean energy.?Even if it takes 10 years to build one,?nuclear power plants can make clean and reliable electricity?for at least 80 years.

（視頻） （Isodope 的掌聲）?總算是有點(diǎn)新鮮的東西了。?不幸的是， 這個(gè)理由依然很遜。?1970 年代，法國用了 15 年 建造了 45 個(gè)核反應(yīng)堆。?但近代，日本、中國和韓國建造核反應(yīng)堆 只花了 6 年或更短的時(shí)間。?也就是說，BTS 吹頭發(fā) 用的都是清潔能源。?即使建一座 核電站要 10 年，?但它可在 80 年 或更長的時(shí)間里?持續(xù)產(chǎn)生清潔、可靠的電能。

This idea that it takes too long to build plants is confusing,considering we're going to need energy forever.?You know, the best time to build nuclear plants?was 10 years ago.?The next best time is today.

這種修建核電廠很耗時(shí)的觀念 讓人摸不著頭腦，?因?yàn)槲覀儗?duì)能源的需求 是永恒的。?你知道嗎， 修建核電站的最好時(shí)機(jī)?是 10 年前。下一個(gè)最好時(shí)機(jī)， 就是現(xiàn)在。

Now we’ve finally arrived at the most fashionable objection at the moment:?nuclear power is too expensive.?I'm going to take that one.?A little weird to say something is too expensive?to save the future of our species,?but I get it, cost matters.?Here's the thing.We know how to make clean energy cheaper.?It's not rocket science.?You build the same thing over and over and over.?Solar, 10 years ago, was also considered "too expensive,"?but we decided it was cool and invested in it.?Like magic, the costs have dropped by 90 percent.?One way to make nuclear cheaper is with small modular reactors like these.?China just finished building their own version.?Poland will use a similar technology?to convert their aging coal plants into nuclear plants.?They'll use the same building, the same transmission lines,?even retrain the same workers.?But now making clean energy?instead of buying dirty fuels from dictators.

我們終于說到關(guān)于反對(duì)核電站的 最時(shí)髦的理由：?核能太貴了。?這一點(diǎn)由我本人來回應(yīng)。?說一件能夠拯救 人類未來的東西太貴，?多少有點(diǎn)奇怪。?但我能理解， 成本很重要。?但老實(shí)說，?我們知道如何降低 清潔能源的成本。?并不是什么 高精尖的科技。?反復(fù)不停地建設(shè)就行。?10 年前，人們同樣認(rèn)為 太陽能“太昂貴”，?但我們投資了 這項(xiàng)很酷的技術(shù)。?而它的成本也像魔術(shù)一般 降低了 90%。?降低核能成本的方法之一就是 使用這種模塊化的小型反應(yīng)堆。?中國已經(jīng)建成了 自己的版本。?波蘭將會(huì)使用類似的技術(shù)?將其不斷老化的火電廠 改造為核電廠。?它們將使用原有的建筑 和電力傳輸線路，?甚至保留原有的工人。?這么一來，波蘭就能 自己生產(chǎn)清潔能源，?而無需從獨(dú)裁者手中 購買骯臟的化石燃料。

Which leads me to a crazy idea.?What if instead of viewing nuclear power as destructive,?we view it as a force for energy independence?and even peace.?What if this technology offers our best hope for the future??A future where wars aren't funded by our addiction to fossil fuels.?A future where energy is clean.?A future where electricity finally makes its way?to the 700 million people on Earth?who still don't have access to it.?The idea that nuclear power is bad is costing us that future.?And it's time to let go of it.

這讓我有了一個(gè) 瘋狂的想法。?如果我們不將核能 看作是毀滅性的，?而將其視為實(shí)現(xiàn)能源獨(dú)立，?甚至是和平的途徑。?如果核能技術(shù)是我們 通向未來的最大的希望呢？?在這樣的未來里，戰(zhàn)爭不至因我們對(duì) 化石燃料的極度依賴而起。?在這樣的未來里， 我們有著清潔的能源，?在這樣的未來里， 地球上最后的那 700 萬?還沒有用上電的人，?終于用上了電。?認(rèn)為核能很壞的這一觀念 正摧毀這一未來。?是時(shí)候改變這一觀念了。

I'm not asking you to build a reactor.?I'm not asking you to rewrite "The Simpsons."

我不是要大家 去親手建設(shè)核電站，?也不是要大家去重寫 《辛普森一家》的劇本。

I'm not even asking you to sign a petition on Change.org.?All I'm asking you is to please, join me in spreading the meme.?Nuclear energy is cool.?Thank you.

我甚至不要求大家 去 Change.org 上簽請(qǐng)?jiān)笗?我只是想請(qǐng)大家和我一起 轉(zhuǎn)發(fā)傳播這些梗圖。?核能很酷。?謝謝。