I got a little obsessed with mine.

我自己也是愛用者。

In fact I got a little obsessed with all my stuff.

事實上,我是不折不扣的戀物狂。

Have you ever wondered where all the stuff we buy, comes from

你有沒有想過, 我們買的東西是從那裡來?

and where it goes when we throw it out?

在我們把它丟掉後, 又葬身何處?

I couldn't stop wondering about that. So I looked it up.

我不得不認真的思考這個問題。 因此,我就去找答案。

And what the text book said, is that stuff moves through a system

根據教科書的說法, 東西的一生可分成下列幾個階段,

from extraction to production to distribution to consumption to disposal.

從原料開採--到產品製造— 到分配行銷--到消費使用— 到最後的廢棄處理,

All together, it is called the materials economy. Well, I looked into it a little bit more.

這些通通都稱為物質經濟。 嗯,我曾經更深入地去探究這個系統。

In fact, I spent 10 years traveling the world,

事實上,我花了十年的時間 到世界各地旅遊,

tracking where our stuff comes from and where it goes.

為的就是要追蹤 東西的來源和去處。

And you know what I found out? That is not the whole story.

你知道我發現了什麼? 那就是圖片上顯示的 並非所有的故事,

There's a lot missing from this explanation.

其中還遺漏了很多真相。

For one thing, this system looks like it's fine. No problem.

首先,這套系統看起來很不錯, 沒有問題。

But the truth is it’s a system in crisis.

事實上這系統正處於危機之中,

And the reason it is in crisis is that it is a linear system

理由是這是個線性系統,

and we live on a finite planet

而我們居住的地方 是個有限的星球,

and you can not run a linear system on a finite planet indefinitely.

你不能在有限的星球上 無限期地運作線性的系統。

Every step along the way, this system is interacting with the real world.

這套線性系統在以上所說的每一 個步驟,都與真實的世界互動,

In real life it’s not happening on a blank white page.

現實生活中它並非是空白的,

It’s interacting with societies, cultures, economies, the environment.

它與社會、文化、經濟 和環境都有關,

And all along the way, it’s bumping up against limits.

可是它的每一個階段卻與 極限互相砥觸。

Limits we don't see here because the diagram is incomplete.

我們在此處看不到極限是因為 這張圖解不夠完整。

So lets go back through, let's fill in some of the blanks and see what's missing.

所以我們要回到原點從新檢視, 把空白處填滿,然後看看我們 還遺漏了什麼。

Well, one of the most important things its missing is people, yes people.

好,這裡有一樣很重要的東西 被遺漏了--人,是的,人。

People live and work all along this system.

人的生活和工作與這套系統 都有關係,

And some people in this system matter a little more than others;

可是在這系統裡的某些人,他們 比一般人還要來得有影響力,

Some have a little more say. Who are they?

講的話較有份量,他們是誰呢?

Well, let’s start with the government.

那麼,就先從政府說起。

Now my friends tell me I should use a tank to symbolize the government

我的朋友告訴我應該 用坦克比喻成政府,

and that’s true in many countries and increasingly in our own,

對某些國家而言這是事實, 對美國來說更是如此,

after all more than 50% of our federal tax money is now going to the military,

畢竟,我們國家超過百分之五十的 聯邦稅全用在軍事上。

but I’m using a person to symbolize the government

這裡我用人來比喻政府,

because I hold true to the vision and values that governments should be

是因為我仍然確信政府 存在的價值

of the people, by the people, for the people.

就是民有、民治和民享。

It's the governments job to watch out for us, to take care of us. That’s their job.

政府的工作就是照顧老百姓, 關心老百姓,那是他們的職責。

Then along came the corporation.

然而這套系統產生了財團,

Now, the reason the corporation looks bigger than the government

圖片中我把財團畫的比政府大,

is that the corporation is bigger than the government.

理由是財團勢力的確比政府大。

Of the 100 largest economies on earth now, 51 are corporations.

目前地球上最大的一百個 經濟體中,有五十一個是財團。

As the corporations have grown in size and power, we’ve seen a little change in the government

隨著財團的規模和勢力的成長, 我們發現政府也有些改變,

where they’re a little more concerned in making sure

也就是說政府愈來愈

everything is working out for those guys than for us.

在乎財團而不管老百姓的死活。

OK, so lets see what else is missing from this picture.

好吧,讓我們再看看這張圖片 還遺漏了什麼?

We'll start with extraction.

先從原料開採說起。

which is a fancy word for natural resource exploitation

所謂的原料開採, 其實就是剝削自然資源、

which is a fancy word for trashing the planet.

破壞地球生態。

What this looks like is we chop down trees, we blow up mountains to get the metals inside,

看看這裡,我們砍伐樹木、 炸山挖礦、

we use up all the water and we wipe out the animals.

用光水源、和獵殺動物。

So here we are running up against our first limit.

在這裡我們正在快速消耗 我們的第一個極限,

We are running out of resources. We are using too much stuff.

也就是耗盡自然資源。 我們消耗太多的東西,

Now I know this can be hard to hear, but it's the truth we’ve gotta deal with it.

我知道這令人難以置信, 但這是事實我們不得不面對它。

In the past three decades alone,

在過去三十年來,

one-third of the planet’s natural resources base have been consumed. Gone.

我們就消耗了地球上三分之一的 自然基本資源──全用光了。

We are cutting and mining and hauling and trashing the place so fast

由於快速地濫砍、濫採、 濫捕和濫丟的結果,

that we’re undermining the planet’s very ability for people to live here.

我們已經危害了 地球維持人類生存的能力。

Where I live, in the United States, we have less than 4% of our original forests left.

我所居住的美國,全國 剩下不到百分之四的原始森林,

Forty percent of the waterways have become undrinkable.

百分之四十的河川水道 已變得不可飲用。

And our problem is not just that we’re using too much stuff,

而且我們的問題 不只是消耗太多的東西,

but we’re using more than our share. We have 5% of the world’s population

還在於我們用的 遠比我們應得的還要多。 譬如美國占全世界人口的5%,

but we’re consuming 30% of the world’s resources and creating 30% of the world’s waste.

卻消耗世界上30%的資源,同時 也製造了世界上30%的垃圾。

If everybody consumed at U.S. rates, we would need 3 to 5 planets.

假如每個人都按照美國人的消費 速率,我們需要三到五個地球,

And you know what? We’ve only got one.

可是你知道嗎? 我們只有一個地球。

So, my country’s response to this limitation is simply to go take somebody else’s!

然而我的國家對有限資源的回應 是,只要到別的國家拿就有了。

This is the Third World, which – some would say –

看這是第三世界,有些人會說

is another word for our stuff that somehow got on someone else’s land.

它是我們東西的另一代名詞, 言外之意就是要東西就想辦法 到別的國家取回來,

So what does that look like? The same thing: trashing the place.

那樣結局又如何?同樣的戲碼 不停地上演,就是:破壞土地。

75% of global fisheries now are fished at or beyond capacity.

目前全球75%的漁場 被過度捕撈。

80% of the planet’s original forests are gone.

全球80%的原始森林 被砍伐殆盡。

In the Amazon alone, we’re losing 2000 trees a minute.

光是在亞馬遜, 我們每分鐘就失去兩千棵樹,

That is seven football fields a minute.

也就是每分鐘失去7個 足球場面積的森林。

And what about the people who live here?

那麼當地居民又該怎麼辦?

Well. According to these guys, they don’t own these resources

好的,根據這些胖子的看法, 那些人並不擁有當地的資源,

even if they’ve been living there for generations, they don’t own the means of production

即使他們已住在那裡好幾代。 他們沒有生產的能力,

and they’re not buying a lot of stuff. And in this system,

也沒有購買力, 在這套系統裡,

if you don’t own or buy a lot of stuff, you don’t have value.

假如你沒有東西或買不起東西, 你就是廢物一個。

So, next, the materials move to “production“ and what happens there is we use energy

那麼,下一步就是把原料移到 「生產」,看看我們如何利用

to mix toxic chemicals in with the natural resources to make toxic contaminated products.

能源將化學毒物與自然資源混在 一起,以製成有毒的污染產品。

There are over 100,000 synthetic chemicals in use in commerce today.

今日市面上有超過 十萬種合成化學品,

Only a handful of them have even been tested for health impacts

其中只有少數的化學物質作過 對人體健康影響的測試,

and NONE have been tested for synergistic health impacts,

然而沒有一個曾測試過與其他化 學物質混合後的協同健康效應,

that means when they interact with all the other chemicals we’re exposed to every day.

也就是說,當這些物質與我們每 天都在暴露的化學物質交互作用 後,對我們健康的影響。

So, we don’t know the full impact on health and the environment of all these toxic chemicals.

所以,我們不知道所有這些毒物 對我們健康與環境的完整影響。

But we do know one thing: Toxics in, Toxics Out.

但我們很肯定的是: 毒物進,毒物出。

As long as we keep putting toxics into our inudstrial production systems,

只要我們持續把毒物放進 我們的生產系統中,

we are going to keep getting toxics in the stuff that we bring

我們就會持續不斷地將有毒的 東西帶回家裡、

into our homes, and workplaces, and schools. And, duh, our bodies.

帶回工作場所裡和學校裡,更 糟糕的是,帶進我們的身體裡。

Like BFRs, brominated flame retardants.

例如BFRs,溴化阻燃劑,

They are a chemical that make things more fireproof but they are super toxic.

就是用來讓東西更耐火燒的 化學品,它們可是超級毒物。

They’re a neurotoxin–that means toxic to the brain What are we even doing using a chemical like this?

它們是一種神經毒素──意思就 是這種毒素會毒害人腦。我們為 何還要使用這樣的化學物質呢?

Yet we put them in our computers, our appliances, couches, mattresses, even some pillows.

然而,我們仍然把這些毒素 放到我們的電腦裡、器材裡、 座椅裡、床墊裡,甚至枕頭裡。

In fact, we take our pillows, we douse them in a neurotoxin

事實上,我們買的枕頭, 有些是浸泡到神經毒素裡,

and then we bring them home and put our heads on them for 8 hours a night to sleep.

我們買回家,每天晚上 把頭放在枕頭上睡上八小時;

Now, I don’t know, but it seems to me that in this country with so much potential,

現在我還不知道會對人體 怎麼樣,但對我來說, 既然我們的國家這麼厲害,

we could think of a better way to stop our heads from catching on fire at night.

應該能夠想出更好的辦法來避免 我們的腦袋瓜子晚上被火燒吧?

Now these toxics build up in the food chain and concentrate in our bodies.

這些毒素會累積到食物鏈裡, 然後濃縮在我們的身體裡。

Do you know what is the food at the top of the food chain

你知道是什麼食物位於 食物鏈的最頂層,

with the highest level of many toxic contaminants? Human breast milk.

而含有最高濃度的眾多 毒性污染物?是人類的母奶。

That means that we have reached a point where the smallest members of our societies - our babies

那就是說人類社會中最小的成員 也中獎了,我們的嬰兒在他們的

are getting their highest lifetime dose of toxic chemicals from breastfeeding from their mothers.

黃金時期就已經從母乳中吸進了 他一生中劑量最高的化學毒素,

Is that not an incredible violation?

這是多麼可怕的入侵啊!

Breastfeeding must be the most fundamental human act of nurturing;

餵母乳是人類最基本的餵養行為,

it should be sacred and safe. Now breastfeeding is still best

它必須神聖又安全的。 餵母乳仍然是最好的,

and mothers should definitely keep breastfeeding, but we should protect it. They should protect it.

媽媽們當然應該持續地餵母乳, 不過我們應該保護它, 政府更應該負起保護責任,

I thought they were looking out for us. And of course,

我認為政府更要為我們把關。

the people who bear the biggest of these toxic chemicals

當然,首當其衝的就是 面對這化學毒素的工人,

are the factory workers, many of whom are women of reproductive age.

其中占大多數的就是 生育期的婦女,

They’re working with reproductive toxics, carcinogens and more.

她們正值生育期就要與這些 生殖毒素、致癌物質等共舞。

Now, I ask you, what kind of woman of reproductive age

現在我問你, 什麼樣的生育期婦女

would work in a job exposed to reproductive toxics,

會在充斥著生殖毒素的 場所中工作?

except for a woman with no other option? And that is one of the “beauties” of this system?

當然就是那些毫無選擇的婦女。 這難道不是這套系統 的一種「美麗陷井」?

The erosion of local environments and economies here

它讓當地環境和經濟受到腐蝕,

ensures a constant supply of people with no other option.

使得那兒的人們別無選擇, 只好持續進入這系統為其服務。

Globally 200,000 people a day are moving from environments

全球每天約有二十萬人離開了

that have sustained them for generations,

已生養他們好幾世代的故土,

into cities, many to live in slums, looking for work, no matter how toxic that work may be.

而遷移到城市裡, 很多人都住在貧民窟裡, 找工作,也不管工作多麼毒。

So, you see, it is not just resources that are wasted along this system,

所以你看到了吧,按照這套 系統運作,不只資源被浪費了,

but people too. Whole communities get wasted.

人也被毀了, 整個社區都被毀了。

Yup, toxics in, toxics out.

是的,毒物進,毒物出。

A lot of the toxics leave the factories in products,

很多的毒素隨著產品離開工廠,

but even more leave as by-products, or pollution. And it’s a lot of pollution.

但是還有更多的毒素以副產物 或污染的型式離開工廠, 而這裡也有很多的污染。

In the U.S., our industry admits to releasing over 4 billion pounds of toxic chemicals a year

在美國,工業界承認每年排放 的化學毒素超過40億磅,

and it’s probably way more since that is only what they admit.

事實上他們可能排放更多, 因為這只是他們承認的排放量。

So that’s another limit, because, yuck,

所以這又是另一種極限, 因為,噁,

who wants to look at and smell 4 billion pounds of toxic chemicals a year? So, what do they do?

誰要看到或聞到每年40億磅的 化學毒素呢?因此, 他們做了什麼呢?

Move the dirty factories overseas Pollute someone else’s land!

把這些工廠移到海外去, 去污染別人的土地吧!

But surprise, a lot of that air pollution is coming right back at us, carried by wind currents.

然而更驚人的是,那些大量的 空氣污染又隨著風向直撲回來。

So, what happens after all these resources are turned into products?

那麼,在這些資源變成商品後, 又發生了什麼事呢?

Well, it moves here, for distribution.

好的,箭頭移到這裡, 那就是分配行銷。

Now distribution means “selling all this toxic-contaminated junk as quickly as possible.”

這裡所說的分配行銷,是指 「儘快地把這些有毒污染垃圾 全部賣光。」

The goal here is to keep the prices down, keep the people buying, and keep the inventory moving.

這裡的目標就是壓低產品的 價格,持續人們的購買力 和維持貨物的流通。

How do they keep the prices down? Well, they don’t pay the store workers very much

他們如何壓低價格呢?嗯, 他們付店員很低的薪資,

and they skimp on health insurance every time they can. It’s all about externalizing the costs.

而且每次都儘可能縮減健保費, 這些統稱為成本外部化,

What that means is the real costs of making stuff aren’t captured in the price.

意思就是製造產品的真正成本 並沒有包括在價格裡。

In other words, we aren’t paying for the stuff we buy.

換句話說,我們並沒有付出 真正的代價來買這些東西。

I was thinking about this the other day.

最近我在思考這個問題。

I was walking and I wanted to listen to the news

我走路去上班時, 正好也想聽聽新聞,

so I popped into a Radio Shack to buy a radio.

於是我就衝進一家叫做 Radio Shack的電子連鎖店, 想買一台收音機,

I found this cute little green radio for 4 dollars and 99 cents.

我發現這台小巧又可愛的綠色 收音機只要美金四塊九毛九。

I was standing there in line to buy this thing and I was thinking

當我正要排隊付錢時,我在想

how could $4.99 possibly capture the costs

四塊九毛九怎麼夠付這台 收音機的製造成本和運輸費,

of making this radio and getting it into my hands? The metal was probably mined in South Africa,

然後再賣到我手上?金屬 可能是在南非的礦山裡挖的,

the petroleum was probably drilled in Iraq, the plastics were probably produced in China,

石油可能是在伊拉克的油田裡鑽 的,塑膠可能是在中國製造的,

and maybe the whole thing was assembled by some 15 year old in a maquiladora in Mexico.

而整台機組可能是墨西哥血汗工 廠裡的15歲童工組裝而成的。

$4.99 wouldn’t even pay the rent for the shelf space it occupied until I came along,

四塊九毛九甚至連付 上架空間的租金也不夠,

let alone part of the staff guy’s salary who helped me pick it out,

更別談支付幫我把 這東西挑出來的店員薪水,

or the multiple ocean cruises and truck rides pieces of this radio went on.

或是跨過好幾個海洋的運費, 還有卡車載運費。

That’s how I realized, I didn’t pay for the radio. So, who did pay?

我終於明白,我並沒有付出真正 的代價。那麼,是誰付出了代價?

Well. These people paid with the loss of their natural resource base.

沒錯,就是這些失去 自然資源基礎的人買單的,

These people paid with the loss of their clean air with increasing asthma and cancer rates.

這些人失去了乾淨的空氣,氣喘 和癌症的罹患率也因而大增。

Kids in the Congo paid with their future – 30% of the kids in parts of the Congo

剛果的小孩付出他們的未來, 剛果的某些地區有30%的小孩

now have had to drop out of school to mine coltan,

必須輟學去挖鈳鉭鐵礦,

a metal we need for our cheap and disposable electronics.

這種金屬就是用來做廉價的 可拋式電子產品。

These people even paid, by having to cover their own health insurance.

這些人付出的代價不只如此, 他們還得給付自己的健保費。

All along this system, people pitched in so I could get this radio for $4.99.

按照這套系統一路下來, 由於這些人的貢獻,我才能花 四塊九毛九買到這台收音機。

And none of these contributions are recorded in any accounts book.

然而這些貢獻卻沒有算在 這東西的帳簿裡,

That is what I mean by the company owners externalize the true costs of production.

這就是我說的,公司老闆把 產品的真實成本外部化了。

And that brings us to the golden arrow of consumption.

接下來讓我們 來看消費這個火車頭。

This is the heart of the system, the engine that drives it.

消費是這套系統的核心, 是驅動的引擎。

It is so important that protecting this arrow has become the top priority for both of these guys.

保護這個火車頭,對這些胖子而 言,是首要之務,因為消費對維 持這個爛系統來說,太重要了。

That is why, after 9/11, when our country was in shock,

這也就是為什麼,911之後, 當美國受到震嚇時,

and President Bush could have suggested any number of appropriate things:

布希總統原可建議 很多適當的事情來安撫民心:

to grieve, to pray, to hope. NO. He said to shop. TO SHOP?!

像是表達哀慟、祈禱、與盼望, 但這些他都沒說,他只告訴人們 說「去買東西吧。」買東西?!

We have become a nation of consumers. Our primary identity has become that of being consumers,

我們已成為一個消費王國,現在 消費者已成為我們最主要的身份,

not mothers, teachers, farmers, but consumers.

而非大家所熟悉的母親、老師 或是農夫,而是消費者。

The primary way that our value is measured and demonstrated

現在,這個社會衡量我們 有多少價值,證明我們 有多少價值的主要方式,

is by how much we contribute to this arrow, how much we consume. And do we!

是看我們為這個火車頭帶來 多少動力,看我們消費了多少; 而我們自己竟然也是如此做。

We shop and shop and shop. Keep the materials flowing, And flow they do!

我們不停地買東西呀、買東西、買 東西!只是為了維持貨物流通。而 地球資源也確實不停地被消耗著。

Guess what percentage of total materials flow through this system is still in product or use 6 months after the date of sale in North America?

猜猜看,在產品於北美洲售出半年 後,為了讓我們擁有這些產品而

Fifty percent? Twenty? NO. One percent. One! In other words, 99 percent of the stuff

透過這系統所投入的物質總量, 還有多少比例留在產品中或 在使用中?

we harvest, mine, process, transport – 99 percent of the stuff we run through this system

百分之五十?二十?都不是, 只剩百分之一而已,百分之一! 換句話說,

is trashed within 6 months. Now how can we run a planet

我們所開採、加工處理、和運輸 的物質,我們用來運作這套系統 的東西,有百分之九十九

with that level of materials throughput? It wasn’t always like this.

在產品售出後6個月時, 早已成為垃圾。我們怎麼可能用

The average U.S. person now consumes twice as much as they did 50 years ago.

這種物質產出率來經營地球呢? 我們並不是一直都這樣的。

Ask your grandma. In her day, stewardship and resourcefulness and thrift were valued.

目前美國人的平均消費 是五十年前的兩倍。

So, how did this happen? Well, it didn’t just happen. It was designed.

問問你的老祖母,在她的年代 裡,愛物惜物和節約簡樸都是 被珍惜的價值。

Shortly after the World War 2, these guys were figuring out how to ramp up the economy.

那麼,這到底是如何發生的呢? 這不是就這麼發生的, 而是被設計過。

Retailing analyst Victor Lebow articulated the solution

二次世界大戰之後不久, 這些胖子就在算計 如何榨取美國的經濟。

that has become the norm for the whole system.

零售商分析專家 維克多‧李博 提出了明確的解決之道,

He said: "Our enormously productive economy demands that we make consumption our way of life,

他的辦法後來也成為 這套系統的基準。

that we convert the buying and use of goods into rituals, that we seek our spiritual satisfaction,

他說:「我們龐大的生產經濟體 需要讓消費成為我們的生活模式,

our ego satisfaction, in consumption.

也就是把購買和使用物品 轉換成一種習慣,

We need things consumed, burned up, replaced and discarded at an ever-accelerating rate.”

在消費中達到精神滿足 和自我滿足...

President Eisenhower's Council of Economic Advisors Chairman said

我們需要以一直在加快的速率, 消費、燃燒、更換和拋棄東西。」

that "The American economy's ultimate purpose is to produce more consumer goods."

美國總統艾森豪的 經濟顧問委員會主席曾說過:

MORE CONSUMER GOODS?

「美國經濟的最終目的 是製造更多的消費產品。」

Our ultimate purpose? Not provide health care, or education, or safe transportation,

更多的消費產品???

or sustainability or justice? Consumer goods?

我們「經濟」的最終目的? 不是提供健康照護、教育、 或是安全的交通運輸、

How did they get us to jump on board this program so enthusiastically?

或是永續經營、或是正義? 而是提供消費產品?

Well, two of their most effective strategies are planned obsolescence and perceived obsolescence.