正文翻譯

(Tree planting to offset C02 near Carlisle, Cumbria. Large-scale tree planting will be among the methods used in the project.)

（在坎布里亞郡卡萊爾附近植樹來中和二氧化碳排放。大規(guī)模植樹將是該項目中使用的方法之一。）
新聞：

Degraded peatlands will be re-wetted and replanted in the Pennines and west Wales, while rock chips that absorb CO2 as they break down in soil will be tested on farms in Devon, Hertfordshire and mid-Wales. Special charcoal called biochar will be buried at a sewage disposal site, on former mine sites and railway embankments.

在奔寧山脈和威爾士西部，退化的泥炭地將被重新濕潤并重新種植，而在德文郡、赫特福德郡和威爾士中部的農場將對在土壤中分解吸收二氧化碳的巖屑進行測試。一種叫做生物炭的特殊木炭將被埋在一個污水處理場、以前的礦場和鐵路路堤上。

The best large-scale ways to use trees to capture carbon will also be examined across the UK, including on Ministry of Defence and National Trust land. The last trial will measure the carbon removal potential of energy crops such as willow and miscanthus grass for the first time at commercial scale. These crops would be burned for energy, with the CO2 emissions trapped and stored underground.

在英國，包括國防部和國家信托基金所有的土地上，也將對大規(guī)模利用樹木捕捉碳的最佳方式進行研究。最后一項試驗將首次以商業(yè)規(guī)模測量柳樹和芒草等能源作物的碳去除潛力。這些作物將被燃燒為能源，而排放的二氧化碳將被封存并儲存在地下。

“This is seriously exciting and pretty much world leading,” said Prof Cameron Hepburn, at the University of Oxford and who is leading the coordination of the trials. “Nobody really wants to be in the situation of having to suck so much CO2 from the atmosphere. But that’s where we are – we’ve delayed [climate action] for too long.”

牛津大學的卡梅隆·赫本教授說：“這是一項非常令人興奮的研究，也是世界領先的研究。沒有人真的想要處于不得不從大氣中吸收這么多二氧化碳的境地。但這就是我們的現(xiàn)狀——我們已經(jīng)拖延（氣候行動）太久了?！?/p>

He emphasised that cutting emissions from fossil fuel burning as fast as possible remains vital to tackling global heating: “There’s no suggestion that [CO2 removal] is a substitute for reducing our emissions.”

他強調，盡快減少化石燃料燃燒的排放對應對全球變暖仍然至關重要：“沒有跡象表明（二氧化碳吸收）能夠替代減少排放。”

Scientists at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have concluded there is no way of keeping the global temperature rise to the internationally agreed target of 1.5C without both cutting emissions and removing billions of tonnes of CO2 a year by 2050. The UK’s official climate advisers estimate the UK is likely to need to remove about 100m tonnes of CO2 a year by 2050 to reach net zero.

政府間氣候變化專門委員會的科學家們得出結論，如果每年不同時減排并吸收數(shù)十億噸二氧化碳，那么到2050年就無法將全球氣溫上升控制在國際商定的1.5攝氏度的目標之內。英國官方氣候顧問估計，到2050年，英國可能需要每年吸收約1億噸二氧化碳，才能實現(xiàn)凈零排放。

Carbon removal is also deemed essential because it will be difficult to halt all emissions from sectors such as aviation, farming and cement by 2050. The new trials are part of a ￡110m government programme that also includes trials of using technology to scrub CO2 directly from the air.

碳吸收也被認為是必不可少的，因為到2050年，很難停止來自航空、農業(yè)和水泥等行業(yè)的所有排放。這項新的試驗是政府1.1億英鎊計劃的一部分，該計劃還包括使用技術直接從空氣中清除二氧化碳的試驗。

There is a current debate on whether carbon removal could be used by companies to offset their emissions, rather than cut them, and whether such offsets can be guaranteed to be genuine.

目前有一場辯論是關于企業(yè)是否可以利用碳吸收來抵消碳排放，而不是單純減少排放，以及這種抵消是否可以保證是真實的。

“We are very alive to the possibility that companies will just use offsetting as greenwashing,” said Hepburn. “Part of what this programme is about is to develop the monitoring, reporting and verification frxworks to ensure that removals are genuine.”

赫本說：“我們非常清楚，公司可能只是把抵消當作‘洗綠’。這個項目的部分內容是建立監(jiān)測、報告和核查框架，以確保碳吸收是真實的?！?/p>

Enhanced rock weathering
Spreading basalt chips on fields will be trialled on arable and grazing land. Chemical reactions that degrade the rock lock CO2 into carbonate minerals within months. It is expected that up to 13 tonnes of CO2 per hectare could be locked up each year. In degraded soils, the rock chips can also help reverse acidification and replenish essential plant nutrients. “The joy is that if it does sequester CO2 and lead to enhanced agricultural productivity, then everybody’s laughing,” said Hepburn.

加強巖石風化
在耕地和牧場上進行玄武巖碎塊撒播試驗。在幾個月內，降解巖石的化學反應將二氧化碳鎖定為碳酸鹽礦物。預計每年每公頃土地將有多達13噸二氧化碳被封存。在退化的土壤中，巖屑還可以幫助逆轉酸化并補充土壤必要的植物營養(yǎng)?！傲钊烁吲d的是，如果它確實能封存二氧化碳并提高農業(yè)生產(chǎn)力，那么每個人都會開心的，”赫本說。

Biochar
The trial will be the most comprehensive biochar trial to date and will add 200 tonnes of the material to 12 hectares (29.7 acres) of arable fields and grasslands. The charcoal-like material is produced from wood or organic waste. About 10 tonnes of biochar per hectare can be added to crop fields, but 50 tonnes or more could be buried under grassland. Biochar increases the ability of soil to hold water and nutrients and can help prevent run-off of fertilisers and pesticides.

生物炭
該試驗將是迄今為止最全面的生物炭試驗，將為12公頃（29.7英畝）的耕地和草地增加200噸生物炭。這種類似木炭的材料是從木材或有機廢物中產(chǎn)生的。每公頃約有10噸生物炭可以添加到農田中，但50噸或更多的生物炭可以被埋在草地下。生物炭增加了土壤保持水分和養(yǎng)分的能力，并有助于防止化肥和殺蟲劑的擴散。

Perennial bioenergy crops
Coppiced willow and miscanthus grass can provide fuel for power stations and remove CO2 from the air if the exhaust gas is captured and stored underground. The trial will seek the best varieties and planting methods and assess how much carbon is also stored in the plants’ roots. Twenty hectares will be planted and current estimates are of 11-18 tonnes of CO2 being removed per hectare each year.

常年生物能源作物
灌木柳樹和芒草可以為發(fā)電站提供燃料，如果廢氣被捕獲并儲存在地下，就可以從空氣中去除二氧化碳。這項試驗將尋求最好的品種和種植方法，并評估植物根系中還儲存了多少碳。該項目將種植20公頃的土地，目前估計每公頃土地每年將清除11-18噸二氧化碳。

Large-scale tree planting
“Trees represent the most cost-effective way of removing CO2 from the atmosphere, while also delivering benefits such as enhancing biodiversity and recreational and health improvements,” said Prof Ian Bateman, at the University of Exeter, who is leading these trials.

大規(guī)模的植樹
領導這些試驗的埃克塞特大學伊恩·貝特曼教授說：“樹木是消除大氣中二氧化碳最經(jīng)濟有效的方式，同時還能帶來諸如增強生物多樣性、娛樂和健康改善等好處。”

But he warned planting trees can have disastrous consequences, if they are planted on peat and release carbon, for example. The trials will test how to plant the right tree in the right place. The trees will be measured and also surveyed by drone and carbon buildup in the soils will be checked.

但他警告說，例如，如果把樹木種植在泥炭上并釋放碳，就會產(chǎn)生災難性的后果。這些試驗將測試如何在正確的地方種植正確的樹。樹木將由無人機測量和調查，土壤中的碳積累也將被檢查。

評論翻譯

twistedLucidityScotland?
Interesting. Tackling climate change is going to require us to do everything I guess.

有意思。我想，應對氣候變化需要我們盡一切努力。

spinesight?
I mean, climate change is basically happening because we're taking co2 that's been removed from the eco system for millions of years and pumping it back into the atmosphere, getting it back out of the atmosphere should always have been a priority

我想說，氣候變化基本上正在發(fā)生，因為我們正在把數(shù)百萬年來從生態(tài)系統(tǒng)中吸收的二氧化碳又重新排放回大氣中，再把它從大氣中抽回來應該一直是優(yōu)先考慮的事情

iTAMEi
I went to a lecture awhile ago and the speaker concluded we’re pretty much going to have to tinker with large scale geo-engineering.
It’s risky but economic systems are just can’t change fast enough and everyone’s pointing fingers. Consumers blame businesses, business blame competitors, govts blame other govts.
Personally I’ve just accepted we’ll probably have a drop in living standards and insane levels of migration in the future.

不久前我去聽了一個講座，演講人總結說我們將不得不對大規(guī)模的地球工程進行修補。
這是有風險的，但經(jīng)濟體系的變化不夠快，每個人都在相互指責。消費者指責企業(yè)，企業(yè)指責競爭對手，政府指責其他政府。
就我個人而言，我已經(jīng)接受了未來我們的生活水平可能會下降和瘋狂的移民水平的前景。

Tom6187
They'll do anything to stop it, apart from curb capitalistic greed, which is the actual root cause.

他們會做任何事情來阻止氣候變暖，除了遏制資本主義的貪婪，但資本主義的貪婪才是真正的根源。

Tom6187
Recycling is a scam unfortunately.
As for going plant based reducing carbon footprint, that is also a scam and a lie.

不幸的是，回收利用就是一個騙局。
至于以工廠為基礎來減少碳排放，那也是一個騙局和謊言。

sgkssbxuxndb?
72% of UK land is used for agriculture and makes up 0.5% of our GDP. I'm not saying farming is useless, but the land needs to be used better. Destroyed forests and ecosystems for the land.

英國72%的土地用于農業(yè)，占GDP的0.5%。我不是說農業(yè)沒有用，但土地需要更好地利用。農業(yè)會破壞森林和土地生態(tài)系統(tǒng)。

bcjdosmdndb?
I’m desperate for Dutch style vertical farming for produce (not meat) with an embrace of GMO’s to boost yield and free up other land to be far more productive.
Such a no brainer, but the anti-science crowd won’t have a bar of it.

我非常希望荷蘭式的農產(chǎn)品（不是肉類）生產(chǎn)方式：垂直農場，采用轉基因技術來提高產(chǎn)量，解放出更多的土地來生產(chǎn)更多的產(chǎn)品。
這是一個顯而易見的問題，但反科學的人群不會對此有任何看法。

ParrotofDoom
I don't think we should overestimate the ability of trees to remove Co2 from the air. While more fauna and flora is good, we need to stop generating Co2 to really make a difference.
That means using less energy. Better home insulation. Less driving. Less waste.

我認為我們不應該高估樹木清除空氣中二氧化碳的能力。雖然有更多的動物群和植物群是好事，但我們需要停止產(chǎn)生二氧化碳來真正發(fā)揮減排作用。
這意味著使用更少的能源。更好的房屋保溫。少開車。更少浪費。

Ninjaff?
Just plant 36 billion trees a year...somewhere? Everywhere? Oh, and then keep them forever or the carbon is released. Problem solved.

每年在某個地方種360億棵樹？到處都種上？哦，然后永遠保存它們，否則碳就被排放了。問題解決了。

EastRidingof Yorkshire?
Also when someone agrees to the idea of “plant a fuck ton of trees” what you end up with is lots of saplings too close to each other, without biodiversity, most of which die off and which never have any further management.
But (usually) a man gets to say they planted a 1000 trees so it was ok they ripped up some ancient woodland to build that shitty pub and car park.

而且，當有人同意“種一大堆樹”的想法時，你最終得到的結果是大量的樹苗彼此靠得太近，沒有生物多樣性，大多數(shù)都死掉了，并且種完了之后再也沒有任何進一步的管理。
但是（通常（）一個人會說他們已經(jīng)種了1000棵樹，所以（作為置換）他們可以夷平一些古老的林地來建一個糟糕的酒吧和停車場。

TakeshiKovacs46
Less cattle breeding as well. But like cutting down on meat, most people aren’t willing to make even the smallest of changes to help the problem. They want their shit, and they want it now.

也要少養(yǎng)牛。但就像減少肉類攝入一樣，大多數(shù)人都不愿意做出哪怕是最小的改變來幫助解決這個問題。他們想要他們的需求，而且現(xiàn)在就要。

Scottishtwat69?
It has taken a significant amount of effort over hundreds of years to increase the amount of Co2 in the air. It's a very easy process to release it and that process usually has some direct benefit (like heating your home). It would take a similar sort of effort to completely reverse that in a similar timeline, and that effort doesn't provide a direct benefit to you.
The easiest and most efficient solution is simply to cut emissions, try suck up a little of what we still output and mitigate the damage. We cannot continue to walk into disaster with a vague hope there will be some pseudoscience fix.

在過去的幾百年里，人們使勁增加空氣中的二氧化碳含量。排放是一個非常簡單的過程，并且這個過程通常有一些直接的好處（如加熱你的家）。所以在類似的時間線中，你需要付出類似的努力才能完全扭轉這種局面，而這種努力并不能給你帶來直接的好處。
最簡單、最有效的解決方案就是減少排放，并努力吸收我們仍然產(chǎn)出的少量溫室氣體，從而減輕危害。我們不能抱著一種模棱兩可的覺得會有一些偽科學的解決辦法的希望繼續(xù)走向災難。

Significant-Day945?
Ever thought about a giant algae bloom in the ocean? That would be good. It could be managed be collection of algae for soil improvement and farming.

有沒有想過在海洋中培育巨大的海藻？那效果肯定好。它可以通過收集藻類來改善土壤和耕作進行管理。

Coulomb_man
Algae blooms are notorious for using all available oxygen and killing off lakes etc because of it...
They don't really spend as much time photosynthesizing as they do respiring.

赤潮現(xiàn)象是臭名昭著的，因為它消耗了所有可用的氧氣，殺死了湖泊生態(tài)等等。
由于它們的呼吸作用，它們并不花很多時間進行光合作用。

Curdz-019?
Why do we need to trial trees? I thought they were already a well proven technology

為什么我們需要試驗樹木？我以為我們已經(jīng)很好地驗證過（它們的光合作用）了。

Thatcsibloke
We could start by planting trees instead of talking about planting trees. I reckon we can fit 50 just in my bit of the neighbourhood I live in. I’ve planted two on my little plot, and 5 at my last house. How about hedges? There are thousands of miles of ratty, incomplete hedges everywhere. Fill in the gaps.

我們可以從種樹開始，而不是光空談種樹。我想我住的那個街區(qū)能容納50顆樹。我在我的附近種了兩棵，在我上一幢房子附近種了五棵。還有樹籬？這里綿延數(shù)千英里，到處都是殘缺不全的樹籬。我們可以填補空缺。

The_Invader_KilzYorkshire?
I wonder what our CO2 contribution is compared to countries llike China, India, and Qatar? It feels like a drop in the ocean when the world's biggest CO2 contributors are not as "environmentally-conscious" as the UK.
Edit: downvoted for asking a genuine question. Can't even engage in civil discussion anymore?

我想知道，與中國、印度和卡塔爾等國家相比，我們的二氧化碳排放量是多少？當世界上最大的二氧化碳排放國沒有英國這樣的“環(huán)保意識”時，感覺我們這些努力就像滄海一粟。
PS：就因為問了一個真實的問題而被踩。都不能參與公民討論了嗎？

cromlyngames
But a random Chinese or indian person contributes far less than you or I, on a per capita basis. A Qatari, far far more. I'm not sure you can just wish away the population size difference.

但隨便一個中國人或印度人的人均排放遠遠低于你或我的。一個卡塔爾人，排放又遠遠多于我們。我不確定你能否希望不考慮人口規(guī)模的差異。

DoomslicerNorwich?
The Uk contributes around 2% of global emissions, while being 0.87% of global population.
The 'official' number is 1% of emissions, because we've offshored/ignored half our emissions.
~14% of China's emissions are related to non-Chinese consumption.
The average UK citizen officially generates around 5.8 metric tons of CO2e annually. Include the doubling from consumption/shipping/aviation and it's 11.6 tons per capita. China is generating 7.2 tons per capita, but its consumptive emissions are 14% lower, so ~6.2 tons per capita.
Indians emit 1.91 tons per capita.

英國的排放量占全球的2%，但人口只占全球的0.87%。
“官方”數(shù)字是排放量的1%，因為我們把一半的排放量轉移到海外或忽略掉了。
大約14%的中國排放與非中國消費有關。
據(jù)官方統(tǒng)計，平均每位英國公民每年產(chǎn)生約5.8公噸的二氧化碳。加上消費/航運/航空的翻倍，人均11.6噸。中國的人均碳排放量為7.2噸，但其自身的消費排放量還要減去14%，即人均碳排放量約為6.2噸。
印度人均排放1.91噸。

tadcan?
Sure in terms of modern day productrion, but the industrial revolution in the U.K begun in the 1700's, so you also need to compare the historical output to what China is producing.?

當然，就現(xiàn)代生產(chǎn)而言是這樣，但英國的工業(yè)革命始于18世紀，所以你也需要將歷史排放量拿來一并與中國的排放量進行比較。

Thatcsibloke?
I think the issue is that, while we pretend to be the good guys, we have just shifted polluting to China. Every product should have a carbon and pollution tax. For a start: plastic bottles should be taxed at ￡10 a pop.

我認為問題在于，當我們假裝是好人的時候，我們只是把污染轉移到了中國。每一種產(chǎn)品都應該被征收碳排放和污染稅。首先，塑料瓶應該被征收10英鎊的稅。