我們的生活依賴于遏制氣候變化，但許多優(yōu)先事項似乎都在競爭。人類現(xiàn)在能做的最緊迫的事情是什么？社會企業(yè)家 James Irungu Mwangi 告訴我們，為什么非洲可以成為推廣最新和最雄心勃勃的氣候技術(shù)的理想家園——包括在肯尼亞地獄之門國家公園這樣的地方，該公園可能成為他所謂的“大碳谷”的一部分。

Welcome to the gates of hell.?Now depending on your frame of mind,?that is either a bizarrely morbid or entirely appropriate wayto start a talk about climate action in the year 2022.?Behind me is a picture from the Hell's Gate National Park?in the town of Naivasha, in the Great Rift Valley?in my home country, Kenya.Now its name may not scream “tourist trap,”?but believe me,?it is a beautiful part of the world and you should all try and visit sometime.?But more importantly, it could play --?It has the potential to play a crucial role?in the fight against global climate catastrophe.

歡迎來到地獄之門。?現(xiàn)在取決于你的心態(tài)，?這要么是一種奇怪的病態(tài)，要么是完全合適的方式?來開始談?wù)?2022 年的氣候行動。?我身后是一張來自地獄之門國家公園的?照片?我的祖國肯尼亞的?大裂谷。現(xiàn)在它的名字可能不會叫“旅游陷阱”，?但相信我，?它是世界上美麗的一部分，你們都應(yīng)該嘗試一下。?但更重要的是，它可以發(fā)揮作用——它有可能?在對抗全球氣候災(zāi)難中發(fā)揮關(guān)鍵作用。

The most recent IPCC reports are clear.?Humanity has left cutting emissions too late.?Any realistic path to avoiding unacceptable levels of warming?now requires us to not only drastically cut emissions,?at least halving them by 2030,?but also undertake an equally massive effort?to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere?at an accelerating rate.

最近的 IPCC 報告很清楚。?人類已經(jīng)為時已晚。?現(xiàn)在，任何避免不可接受的變暖水平的現(xiàn)實途徑都?要求我們不僅要大幅減少排放，?至少到 2030 年將排放量減半，?而且還要做出同樣巨大的努力，?以加快速度從大氣中清除溫室氣體。

Now, let's be clear.?Greenhouse gas removal is not and cannot be an excuse for continuing to emit.?Just as installing seat belts and airbags is not an excuse?for deliberately ramming your car into a wall.

現(xiàn)在，讓我們說清楚。?溫室氣體清除不是也不能成為繼續(xù)排放的借口。?就像安裝安全帶和安全氣囊不是?故意將汽車撞到墻上的借口一樣。

(Laughter)?Indeed, current estimates suggest?that even with drastic emissions reductions,?the world will need to be removingbetween five and 16 billion tons of carbon dioxide?from the atmosphere every single year by 2050.

（笑聲）?事實上，目前的估計表明?，即使排放量大幅減少，?到 2050 年，世界每年仍需?要從大氣中去除5 到 160 億噸二氧化碳。

Now to give you a sense of the scale of that,?the low end of that range, five billion tons,?that's bigger than the size of the global petroleum industry in 2020.?So let's not kid ourselves that carbon removal,?at anywhere close to the scale that we will need in order to survive,?is some sort of easy way out.?It is going to be damn difficult to do.?So how do we do it?

現(xiàn)在讓你了解一下它的規(guī)模，?這個范圍的低端，50 億噸，?這比 2020 年全球石油工業(yè)的規(guī)模還要大。?所以，讓我們不要自欺欺人，?在任何接近我們?yōu)榱松娑枰囊?guī)模，?是某種簡單的出路。這將是非常困難的事情。?那么我們該怎么做呢？

Well, the first and most familiar measures would be interventionssuch as reforestation and landscape restoration.?Essentially giving Mother Nature the time and space to heal herself.?In addition, we can increase the amount of carbon held in our soilsthrough the widespread application of biochar?and enhanced weathering of chemically suitable rocks.?We estimate that in Africa alone,?something like 100 million to 680 million additional tons of carbon dioxide?could be drawn from the atmosphere using these types of methods.?However, they do require a lot of land,?a lot of water and a lot of other natural resources?that may limit the extent to which we can scale them.?Moreover, they are subject to some of the feedback loops?from the climate change that we are already experiencing,?such as more frequent and intense wildfires.?And all of that means we are going to need to supplement them with technologies?that accelerate and amplify natural processes?to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

嗯，第一個也是最熟悉的措施將是?重新造林和景觀恢復(fù)等干預(yù)措施。?本質(zhì)上是給大自然母親治愈自己的時間和空間。?此外，我們可以?通過廣泛應(yīng)用生物炭?和增強(qiáng)化學(xué)適宜巖石的風(fēng)化作用來增加土壤中的碳含量。?我們估計，僅在非洲，?使用這些類型的方法就可以從大氣中額外抽取 1 億至 6.8 億噸二氧化碳。?然而，它們確實需要大量土地、大量水和許多其他自然資源，這可能會限制我們擴(kuò)展它們的程度。?此外，它們還受到?我們已經(jīng)經(jīng)歷的氣候變化的一些反饋循環(huán)的影響，?例如更頻繁和更強(qiáng)烈的野火。?所有這一切意味著我們將需要用?加速和放大自然過程?以從大氣中去除二氧化碳的技術(shù)來補(bǔ)充它們。

Enter the members of my new favorite boy band.?DAC, BECCS and BiCRS.

輸入我最喜歡的新男孩樂隊的成員。?DAC、BECCS 和 BiCRS。

These are a set of engineered approaches?that use physical, chemical and biological processes?to gather and concentrate carbon dioxide from the atmosphere?before safely sequestering it, usually underground.?As more people run the climate math,you're seeing growing levels of interest and investment in these technologies,?with billions of dollars already being committed to early pilots?and installations in various parts of the world,particularly in Europe and North America.?But the reality is they have a very long way to go.?To date, engineered removals around the world?have accounted for something like 100,000 tons?of carbon dioxide removed total.?To get to the multi-billion-ton scale we’re going to need by 2050?is going to take a truly epic process of exponential scaling.?Probably means we need to get to something --?If we want to have a realistic shot at it,?we need to get to something like 100 million tons per year by 2030.?For those of you running the calculators,?that's a thousand-fold increase in less than a decade.?And guess what??We will have to continue that insane rate of growth?for another two decades after that.

這些是一組工程方法?，使用物理、化學(xué)和生物過程?從大氣中收集和濃縮二氧化碳，?然后將其安全隔離，通常是地下。?隨著越來越多的人從事氣候數(shù)學(xué)，?您會看到對這些技術(shù)的興趣和投資水平越來越高，?數(shù)十億美元已經(jīng)投入到?世界各地的早期試點(diǎn)和安裝中，?特別是在歐洲和北美。?但現(xiàn)實是他們還有很長的路要走。?迄今為止，世界各地的工程清除?總二氧化碳排放量約為100,000 噸。?為了達(dá)到我們到 2050 年所需的數(shù)十億噸規(guī)模，我們將經(jīng)歷?一個真正史詩般的指數(shù)級擴(kuò)展過程。?可能意味著我們需要實現(xiàn)一些目標(biāo)——?如果我們想實現(xiàn)現(xiàn)實的目標(biāo)，?我們需要到 2030 年達(dá)到每年 1 億噸的目標(biāo)。對于那些使用計算器的人來說，?這是增加一千倍在不到十年的時間里。?你猜怎么著？?在那之后的二十年里，我們將不得不繼續(xù)這種瘋狂的增長速度。

And here's the really bad news.?Anything close to that level of scaling of this industry?in the places where it’s currently being piloted?presents some really difficult climate action trade offs.?For that, let me take the example of DAC or direct air capture.?The best known DAC facility in the world is in Iceland.?It's the Orca plant in Iceland, it was inaugurated last year, 2021.?It uses plentiful green geothermal energy?to capture carbon dioxide, dissolve it in water?and inject it into porous basalt deep underground,?where it chemically reacts to create a stable solidthat can stay there for centuries.?It takes the equivalent of between two and three megawatt hours of energy?to take a single ton of carbon dioxide today?and render it in that way.?To get to the hundred million number in 2030,?on that track,?would entail something like 200 to 300 terawatt hours of electricity.Again, that's about half the electricity usage of Germany.?And all of that power would need to be renewable,?otherwise, we would be taking two steps forward?and one and a half steps back.

這是真正的壞消息。?在目前正在試點(diǎn)的地方，任何接近該行業(yè)規(guī)模的任何事情都會?帶來一些非常困難的氣候行動權(quán)衡。為此，讓我以 DAC 或直接空氣捕獲為例。世界上最著名的 DAC 設(shè)施位于冰島。它是冰島的 Orca 工廠，于 2021 年落成。它利用豐富的綠色地?zé)崮?/span>捕獲二氧化碳，將其溶解在水中，然后注入地下深處的多孔玄武巖中，在那里發(fā)生化學(xué)反應(yīng)，形成一種穩(wěn)定的固體，可以在那里呆了幾個世紀(jì)。它需要相當(dāng)于兩到三兆瓦時的能量?今天取一噸二氧化碳并以這種方式呈現(xiàn)。?要在 2030 年達(dá)到 1 億這個數(shù)字，?在這條軌道上，?將需要大約 200 到 300 太瓦時的電力。?同樣，這大約是德國用電量的一半。?所有這些能量都需要是可再生的，?否則，我們將向前邁出?兩步，后退一步半。

Now it's reasonable to expect and assume?that we are going to see substantial improvements in energy efficiency?of these technologies?as we deploy them and learn to use them better.However, keep in mind that probably?the most urgent thing we can do to slow climate change right now?is stop current emissions.?And so scaling these technologies?in places where we do have fossil fuel energy emissions?that we could be curtailingdoes not make sense.?Essentially, every unit of renewable energythat we are bringing on stream in places like North America and Europe?should be going towards displacing?and retiring existing fossil fuel capacity.?And so the world is kind of stuck.?Right??We need to scale this technology.?We need to get DAC down the cost curve and up the efficiency curve urgently.?Our lives literally depend on it.?But at the same time, we cannot do it?except at the expense of other equally urgent climate imperatives.

現(xiàn)在可以合理地期待和假設(shè)，?隨著我們部署這些技術(shù)并學(xué)會更好地使用它們，我們將看到這些技術(shù)的能源效率得到顯著提高。?但是，請記住，我們現(xiàn)在為減緩氣候變化所能做的最緊迫的事情可能是停止當(dāng)前的排放。因此，在我們可以減少化石燃料能源排放的地方推廣這些技術(shù)是沒有意義的。從本質(zhì)上講，我們在北美和歐洲等地投入使用的每一種可再生能源都應(yīng)該朝著取代和淘汰現(xiàn)有化石燃料產(chǎn)能的方向發(fā)展。?所以這個世界有點(diǎn)卡住了。?正確的？?我們需要擴(kuò)展這項技術(shù)。?我們迫切需要讓 DAC 降低成本曲線并提高效率曲線。?我們的生活確實依賴于它。?但與此同時，我們不能這樣做，除非以犧牲其他同樣緊迫的氣候要求為代價。

So we need places in the world that somehow have three characteristics.?A, they need to have the right geophysical conditions.?You know, plenty of porous basalt rock in a geothermally active zone?is one such example.?Two, they need to have plenty of renewable energy potential.?And three,?they need to have no current proximate emissions?that that renewable energy could be used to displace.

因此，我們需要世界上以某種方式具有三個特征的地方。?A，他們需要有合適的地球物理條件。?你知道，地?zé)峄钴S區(qū)的大量多孔玄武巖?就是這樣一個例子。?第二，他們需要有大量的可再生能源潛力。第三，?他們需要沒有?可用于替代可再生能源的當(dāng)前近似排放。

And that brings us back to Hell's Gate National Park.?Here's another view of the park?from an angle that may explain its potential.?That is one of the power plants that together constitutethe Olkaria Geothermal Energy Plant,?which provides about a third of Kenya's electricity.?That's right.?My home country not only has 92 percent renewable electricity?being dispatched on its grids today,?but its largest single-energy installation?is seamlessly integrated into an honest-to-goodness national park.?Literally, between the different plants you can see herds of zebrapeacefully grazing all times of the day.?It's amazing.

這讓我們回到了地獄之門國家公園。?這是公園的另一個?視角，可以解釋它的潛力。?這是共同構(gòu)成?Olkaria 地?zé)岚l(fā)電廠的發(fā)電廠之一，該發(fā)電廠?提供肯尼亞約三分之一的電力。?這是正確的。?今天，我的祖國不僅有 92% 的可再生電力?被分配到其電網(wǎng)上，?而且其最大的單一能源裝置?無縫集成到一個誠實的國家公園中。?從字面上看，在不同的植物之間，您可以看到成群的斑馬?在一天中的所有時間都在安靜地吃草。?太奇妙了。

Now at just under 1,000 megawatts,?Olkaria is nothing to sneeze at.?It's one of the largest geothermal electricity installations in the world.?But it's barely scratching the surface of the potential in Kenya.?There's 10 gigawatts of proven,?high-quality geothermal resource in the country,?widely recognized, ready to be tapped.And in addition,?Kenya is endowed with excellent wind and solar resources?that have also barely been exploited.?We are on the equator, after all.?We estimate conservatively that there's about 50 gigawatts?of potential deployable renewable energy in Kenyathat can be readily accessed with the right level of investment.And yet, Kenya remains an energy-poor country?where, despite a lot of progress in recent years,?more than a quarter of the population still does not have access?to basic electricity.?And those that do often pay prices that are almost three times as much?as much as their counterparts in countries like India and China.

現(xiàn)在只有不到 1,000 兆瓦，?Olkaria 沒什么好打噴嚏的。?它是世界上最大的地?zé)岚l(fā)電裝置之一。?但它幾乎沒有觸及肯尼亞潛力的表面。?該國有10 吉瓦已探明?的優(yōu)質(zhì)地?zé)豳Y源，?得到廣泛認(rèn)可，可供開發(fā)。?此外，?肯尼亞擁有極好的風(fēng)能和太陽能資源?，而這些資源也幾乎沒有被開發(fā)過。?畢竟，我們在赤道上。?我們保守估計?，肯尼亞有大約 50 吉瓦的潛在可部署可再生能源?可以通過適當(dāng)?shù)耐顿Y水平輕松獲得。?然而，肯尼亞仍然是一個能源匱乏的國家?，盡管近年來取得了很大進(jìn)展，但仍有?超過四分之一的人口無法獲得?基本電力。?而那些這樣做的人通常支付的價格幾乎?是印度和中國等國家同行的三倍。

Now you might be sitting there wondering,?"Well, all right, James, if this is true,?if Kenya has all of this renewable energy potentialand all of these people in need of energy,?well, before we have this whole conversation about fancy climate tech,?shouldn’t we first have a TED Talk about affordable energy access?”?And you would be right.?Were it not for a particularly cruel paradox of energy economics?in countries like Kenya.?You see, part of the reason why energy is so expensive in the country?is those consumers who are on the grid?have to pay for capacity that is not currently being used.?There's something like 1,000 megawatt hours every day that goes begging?because there isn’t sufficient industrial demand.?At the same time,?those very same high energy prices?make the country unattractive and uncompetitive for manufacturers?and other users of energy?looking for places to site their industries.

現(xiàn)在你可能會坐在那里想，?“好吧，詹姆斯，如果這是真的，?如果肯尼亞擁有所有這些可再生能源潛力?并且所有這些人都需要能源，那么?，在我們進(jìn)行關(guān)于幻想的整個對話之前氣候技術(shù)，?我們不應(yīng)該先做一個關(guān)于負(fù)擔(dān)得起的能源獲取的 TED 演講嗎？”?你是對的。?如果不是?肯尼亞這樣的國家出現(xiàn)了一個特別殘酷的能源經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)悖論。你看，這個國家能源如此昂貴的部分原因?是那些上網(wǎng)的消費(fèi)者?必須為容量買單目前沒有使用。?每天有大約 1,000 兆瓦時在乞討?因為沒有足夠的工業(yè)需求。?與此同時，?同樣高昂的能源價格使該國對制造商?和其他尋找其產(chǎn)業(yè)所在地的能源用戶缺乏吸引力和競爭力。

So to get this straight,?the reason why the average Kenyan cannot get affordable access?to clean, renewable energy despite all of this natural bounty,?is this tremendously frustrating feedback loop where firstly,?we would have all of that energy?if someone invested in renewable power plants.?People would invest in those power plants?if there was a lot of available industry to use the energy.?Available industry would come if energy costs weren’t so high.?And energy costs wouldn’t be so high if there was enough demand.?It's enough to drive you crazy.But it also points the way to a potential huge triple opportunity.

因此，直截了當(dāng)?shù)卣f，?盡管有這些天然資源，但普通肯尼亞人無法負(fù)擔(dān)得起清潔、可再生能源的原因，?是這個非常令人沮喪的反饋循環(huán)，首先，如果有人投資于可再生能源，我們將擁有所有這些能源植物。如果有很多可用的工業(yè)可以使用能源，人們就會投資這些發(fā)電廠。如果能源成本不那么高，可用的工業(yè)就會出現(xiàn)。如果有足夠的需求，能源成本也不會那么高。足以讓你發(fā)瘋。但它也為潛在的巨大三重機(jī)會指明了方向。

Firstly,?introducing DAC and other energy-hungry climate technology?into places like the Rift Valley?would give them the space and capacity they need?to really scale to planetary levels.With no competition,?with none of the trade-offs they would face in other parts of the world.?At the same time,?having that energy-hungry anchor industry available?suddenly creates the basis on which people are willing to invest?in expanding the country's renewable energy potential.?Actually creating the business casefor providing tens of millions of people?with the productive energy they need to improve the quality of their lives.?And thirdly,introducing these new and exciting technologies?on the continent with the world's youngest and fastest-growing workforce?could potentially activate their imaginations?and their energies towards becoming climate innovators?and solution builders themselves,?basically building an army from the world's largest workforce?to solve the world's biggest problem.

首先，?將 DAC 和其他耗能大的氣候技術(shù)?引入大裂谷等地方，?將為他們?提供真正擴(kuò)展到行星水平所需的空間和容量。?沒有競爭，?沒有他們在世界其他地方將面臨的權(quán)衡取舍。?與此同時，?這種耗能巨大的錨業(yè)?突然出現(xiàn)，為人們愿意投資?擴(kuò)大該國的可再生能源潛力奠定了基礎(chǔ)。?實際上?，為數(shù)以千萬計的人?提供改善生活質(zhì)量所需的生產(chǎn)能源創(chuàng)造了商業(yè)案例。?第三，?在擁有世界上最年輕和增長最快的勞動力的大陸上?引入這些令人興奮的新技術(shù)可能會激發(fā)他們的想象力?和精力，使他們自己成為氣候創(chuàng)新者?和解決方案建設(shè)者，?基本上從世界上最大的勞動力中建立一支軍隊?來解決世界上最大的問題.

I call it the “Great Carbon Valley.”?And it's just one of the ways in which Africa, as the continent,?which, per capita, is the closest to net-zero?and has contributed the least to climate change,?can play a role in helping the planet avert climate disaster.

我稱之為“大碳谷”。?這只是非洲作為?人均最接近凈零排放?且對氣候變化貢獻(xiàn)最小的大陸?在幫助地球避免氣候災(zāi)難方面發(fā)揮作用的方式之一。

But in addition, it can do more?and be the first continent to go substantially net-negative.?We're used to thinking about the continent in terms of its forests,?its peatlands, its grasslands,?its wetlands that need to be preserved.?And we should definitely continue to invest in the Indigenous communities,?the smallholder farmers and the local innovators?who are protecting and expanding natural carbon sinks.?But that should not blind us to the fact?that Africa also provides an ideal potential home?for scaling the latest and most ambitious of climate technologies.

但除此之外，它還可以做得更多?，成為第一個大幅凈負(fù)的大陸。?我們習(xí)慣于從需要保護(hù)的森林、?泥炭地、草原和?濕地的角度來思考這個大陸。?我們絕對應(yīng)該繼續(xù)投資于?保護(hù)和擴(kuò)大自然碳匯的土著社區(qū)、小農(nóng)和當(dāng)?shù)貏?chuàng)新者。?但這不應(yīng)該讓我們忽視這樣一個事實，即非洲也為推廣最新、最雄心勃勃的氣候技術(shù)提供了理想的潛在家園。

Whichever of these narratives most speaks to you,?one thing should be clear.?We need to shake the old, tired idea?that Africa is a poor, hapless, helpless climate change victim.?Instead, Africa and its people have the potential.?They can, and they should, be the world’s climate vanguard.

無論這些敘述中哪一個最能對你說話，?有一件事應(yīng)該是清楚的。?我們需要擺脫陳舊、陳舊的觀念?，即非洲是一個貧窮、不幸、無助的氣候變化受害者。?相反，非洲及其人民具有潛力。?他們可以而且應(yīng)該成為世界氣候先鋒。