应对气候变化的成本小于无所作为的成本

应对气候变化的成本小于无所作为的成本

Two of the biggest myths about climate change have been busted: The first is that we have time to deal with human beings' impact on our planetary climate system. Time is up and we're now living with the beginnings of a changed climate, including more intense storms, drier droughts, scarier floods and hotter wildfires.

关于气候变化的两个最大的神话已经破灭:第一个是我们有时间来处理人类对地球气候系统的影响。时间到了，我们现在正面临着气候变化的开端，包括更猛烈的风暴、更干旱、更可怕的洪水和更猛烈的野火。

The second myth is that mitigating climate change will cost so many billions that we can't possibly afford to do it and that such action would take money away from the poorest people who need it most.

第二个误区是，减缓气候变化将花费数十亿美元，我们不可能负担得起，而且这样的行动将从最需要钱的最贫穷的人那里拿走钱。

The global economy stands to lose 'at least $150 trillion to as much as $792 trillion by the end of the century' if we don't mitigate climate change. (Photo: DisobeyArt/Shutterstock)

According to a new study, the opposite is true.

根据一项新的研究，事实正好相反。

In an article in the journal Nature, researchers found that if human beings fail to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the levels designated in the Paris Agreement, the economic cost would range from $150 trillion to as much as $792 trillion by 2100.

在《自然》杂志的一篇文章中，研究人员发现，如果人类不能将温室气体排放减少到《巴黎协定》规定的水平，到2100年，经济成本将从150万亿美元到792万亿美元不等。

The United States signed the Paris Agreement in 2015 along with 190 other nations, but in August 2017, President Trump filed with the United Nations to withdraw from the agreement — though due to the terms of the original agreement, that withdrawal won't be effective until November 2020. The agreement aims to keep global warming below 2 degrees Celsius. Already, the globe has warmed more than 1 degree.

美国和其他190个国家在2015年签署了《巴黎协定》，但在2017年8月，特朗普总统向联合国提交了退出该协定的申请——尽管由于原协议的条款，该退出直到2020年11月才生效。该协议旨在将全球变暖控制在2摄氏度以下。全球气温已经上升了1度多。

The basis of the Paris Agreement is voluntary actions (NDCs) that nations will take to mitigate CO2 emissions, but so far, few countries have been able to meet their targets, although over 30 cities worldwide have gotten it done.

《巴黎协定》的基础是各国为减少二氧化碳排放而采取的自愿行动(NDCs)，但迄今为止，很少有国家能够实现其目标，尽管全球已有30多个城市做到了这一点。

But even the targets of the Paris Agreement probably aren't enough: "A number of studies have proved that current [NDCs] are not enough to achieve the global warming targets," Biying Yu, from the Beijing Institute of Technology, and co-author of the paper in Nature, told CBS News. She explained that even with the agreed-upon reductions, 3 degrees of warming is projected.

但是，即使是巴黎协议的目标可能也不够:“许多研究已经证明，目前的[NDCs]不足以实现应对全球变暖的目标，”来自北京理工大学的余碧英(音译)，《自然》杂志的这篇论文的作者之一，告诉哥伦比亚广播公司新闻。她解释说，即使达成了一致的减排目标，预计全球气温仍将上升3度。

The costs of not tackling climate change (that $150 trillion and up) come from the destruction wrought by even fiercer storms, flooding, droughts and fires, not to mention the extinctions of animal extinctions and all the other variables that create a very different world.

不应对气候变化的成本(150万亿美元或更多)来自更猛烈的风暴、洪水、干旱和火灾造成的破坏，更不用说动物灭绝和所有其他创造出一个完全不同世界的变量。

What if we take action?

如果我们采取行动呢?

Yu and her colleagues looked at ways countries could improve their NDCs while maximizing gains and minimizing the effect on the economy, which would require global cooperation.

余和她的同事们研究了各国如何在实现收益最大化和对经济影响最小化的同时改善其国家的发展，这需要全球合作。

The net benefit of climate change mitigation would be $127 trillion to $616 trillion by 2100 — that's how much would be gained in economic benefit minus expenses.

到2100年，减缓气候变化的净效益将达到127万亿到616万亿美元——这是经济效益减去支出后的收益。

Seems like a no-brainer, right? The problem? Like many things in our own lives (a more efficient car or furnace), a big cash outlay is needed at the beginning to reap those later economic benefits.

看起来很简单，对吧?这个问题就像我们生活中的许多东西(一辆更节能的汽车或炉子)一样，一开始需要大量的现金投入，以获得后来的经济效益。

"Since many countries and regions would have a negative net income in the early stage due to the large amount of [greenhouse gas] abatement cost, they may refuse to ratchet up current climate actions in the near term and choose to neglect the long-term climate damage, which makes a severe obstacle in achieving global warming targets," Yu told CBS News.

“由于许多国家和地区由于温室气体减排成本高，在初期阶段会有负的净收益，他们可能会在短期内拒绝加强当前的气候行动，而选择忽视长期的气候损害，这将严重阻碍全球变暖目标的实现，”Yu告诉CBS新闻。

As far as climate-change mitigations taking money from those who need assistance, it's worth remembering that it's the poorest and most vulnerable who will be hardest hit by rising tides and devastating storms. So money spent now would protect them later. And when it comes to those populations, we're talking life and death.

就气候变化缓解措施从那些需要援助的人那里拿钱而言，值得记住的是，那些最贫穷、最脆弱的人将受到涨潮和毁灭性风暴的最严重打击。所以现在花的钱以后会保护他们。当涉及到这些人口时，我们谈论的是生与死。

It seems like the choice is clear.

看起来选择是明确的。