The debate is over the proposition

這場辯論的主題是

What the world needs now

「這個世界需要核能-- "

is nuclear energy" -- true or false?

是對還是錯？」

And before we have the debate,

在辯論開始之前

I'd like to actually take a show of hands --

我想讓現場各位簡單表決一下

on balance, right now, are you for or against this?

總體來說，目前你是站在那一方?

So those who are "yes," raise your hand. "For."

贊成核能的人，請舉手

Okay, hands down.

好的，請把手放下

Those who are "against," raise your hands.

反對核能的人，請舉手

Okay, I'm reading that at about

嗯，從舉手的數量來看

75-25 in favor at the start.

目前贊成與反對的比例大約是75:25

Which means we're going to take a vote at the end

辯論完後，我們會再作一次統計

and see how that shifts, if at all.

看是不是有所改變

So here's the format: They're going to have six minutes each,

現在說明規則：雙方各有6分鐘

and then after one little, quick exchange between them,

一方說完馬上換另一方

I want two people on each side of this debate in the audience

我會從現場觀眾挑出2位支持者跟反對者

to have 30 seconds

這4位有30秒

to make one short, crisp, pungent, powerful point.

表達支持論點的理由

So, in favor of the proposition, possibly shockingly,

有點不可思議，今天的辯論正方

is one of, truly, the founders of the

他是環保運動的

environmental movement,

創始者之一

a long-standing TEDster, the founder of the Whole Earth Catalog,

他多次出現在 TED 演講，同時也是雜誌《Whole Earth Catalog》的創辦人

someone we all know and love, Stewart Brand.

我們熟悉且敬愛的，史都華特-布蘭德

Stewart Brand: Whoa.

哇嗚

(Applause)

(掌聲)

The saying is that with climate, those who know the most

說到氣候，瞭解氣候的專家

are the most worried.

一定都非常擔心氣候問題

With nuclear, those who know the most

但是講到核能，最瞭解它的專家

are the least worried.

卻一點都不擔心它

A classic example is James Hansen,

一個典型的例子就是，詹姆斯-漢森

a NASA climatologist

他是NASA的氣候學家

pushing for 350 parts per million

並極力呼籲將大氣中的二氧化碳

carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

降到 350PPM 以下（註：可抵抗暖化的濃度）

He came out with a wonderful book recently

他最近推出了一本書

（Storms of My Grandchildren） called "Storms of My Grandchildren."

書名《子孫的風暴》

And Hansen is hard over for nuclear power,

漢森致力研究核能

as are most climatologists

就像許多氣候學家

who are engaging this issue seriously.

正專注這個問題

This is the design situation:

現在的情況是

a planet that is facing climate change

地球正在面對氣候改變

and is now half urban.

都市面積幾乎佔了陸地的一半

Look at the client base for this.

在這種情況下

Five out of six of us

有6分之5的人（83%）

live in the developing world.

居住在開發中國家

We are moving to cities. We are moving up in the world.

我們會往城市集中，尋找更適合生活的地方

And we are educating our kids,

我們會給予下一代教育

having fewer kids,

生育率下降

basically good news all around.

這些，基本上都是不錯的消息

But we move to cities, toward the bright lights,

我們會往城市光亮的地方聚集

and one of the things that is there that we want, besides jobs,

在城市裡，除了工作，另一個我們要的東西

is electricity.

就是電力

And if it isn't easily gotten, we'll go ahead and steal it.

如果電力不易取得，我們會用偷的

This is one of the most desired things

對於全世界

by poor people all over the world,

住在城市和鄉間的窮人

in the cities and in the countryside.

電力是他們迫切需求的必需品之一

Electricity for cities, at its best,

一個城市所需的電力

is what's called baseload electricity.

我們稱之為基本負載電力

That's where it is on

基本負載電力是指

all the time.

能維繫生活所需的基本電力

And so far there are only three major sources of that --

至今我們主要用 3 種發電方式

coal and gas, hydro-electric,

煤氣發電、水力發電

which in most places is maxed-out --

這二者佔了大部分

and nuclear.

還有一項是核能發電

I would love to have something in the fourth place here,

我希望這張圖表還能加上第4項

but in terms of constant, clean,

這一項是穩定、乾淨、

scalable energy,

可擴展的能源

solar and wind and the other renewables

太陽能、風力、以及其他再生能源

aren't there yet because they're inconstant.

都還不算是這種能源，因為他們都不夠穩定

Nuclear is and has been for 40 years.

迄今，核能的發展已 40 年了

Now, from an environmental standpoint,

目前，站在環境保護的立場來看

the main thing you want to look at

你會特別注意

is what happens to the waste from nuclear and from coal,

我們在核能發電和煤炭發電上

the two major sources of electricity.

消耗了哪些東西，產生了哪些東西

If all of your electricity in your lifetime came from nuclear,

如果你一輩子所用的電力都來自核能

the waste from that lifetime of electricity

為了產生這些發電量所造成的廢棄物

would go in a Coke can --

大概只有一個可樂罐大小

a pretty heavy Coke can, about two pounds.

有點重的可樂罐，大約 2 磅

But one day of coal

不過在一個

adds up to one hell of a lot

發電量十億瓦特的煤炭發電廠

of carbon dioxide

發電一天所產生的二氧化碳

in a normal one-gigawatt coal-fired plant.

會多到嚇死人

Then what happens to the waste?

這些廢棄物會到哪裡去?

The nuclear waste typically goes into

從反應爐取出來的核廢料

a dry cask storage

一般會儲存在一個乾燥桶裡

out back of the parking lot at the reactor site

然後放在反應爐附近的空地

because most places don't have underground storage yet.

目前還沒有太多的地下儲存廠

It's just as well, because it can stay where it is.

但也無傷大雅，至少這些廢料不會亂跑

While the carbon dioxide,

當超多的二氧化碳

vast quantities of it, gigatons,

達到數10億噸的份量

goes into the atmosphere

跑到我們的大氣層

where we can't get it back, yet,

我們就沒辦法再將它們回收

and where it is causing the problems that we're most concerned about.

這將引起許多我們迫切關心的問題

So when you add up the greenhouse gases

當用不同發電方式產生你一生的用電

in the lifetime of these various energy sources,

然後計算這過程所排放的溫室氣體

nuclear is down there with wind and hydro,

核能產生的溫室氣體，低於風力和水力

below solar and way below, obviously, all the fossil fuels.

低於太陽能，也低於所有化石燃料

Wind is wonderful; I love wind.

風力發電是很棒的，我很愛風力

I love being around these

我也喜歡那些

big wind generators.

巨大的風力發電機

But one of the things we're discovering is that

不過我們發現一件事

wind, like solar, is an actually relatively

風力，就像太陽能一樣

dilute source of energy.

發電過程都會稀釋功率，浪費能量

And so it takes a very large footprint on the land,

風力發電需要很大的土地面積

a very large footprint in terms of materials,

建造這些高塔也需要許多資源

five to 10 times what you'd use for nuclear,

大概是核能發電所需的5到10倍

and typically to get one gigawatt of electricity

一般而言，要獲取十億瓦特的發電量

is on the order of 250 sq. mi.

風力發電大概需要

of wind farm.

250平方英哩的土地（約2.5個台北市）

In places like Denmark and Germany,

有些國家，像是丹麥和德國

they've maxed out on wind already.

他們幾乎都用風力發電

They've run out of good sites.

他們幾乎把可能的地點都用盡了

The power lines are getting overloaded.

電力網已經超出負荷

And you peak out.

達到巔峰

Likewise, with solar,

還有，太陽能

especially here in California,

在加州

we're discovering that the 80 solar farm

我們發現在南方沙漠

schemes that are going forward

當地為了建造

want to basically bulldoze

80座太陽能發電廠

1,000 sq. mi. of southern California desert.

用推土機剷出1000平方英里的土地

Well, as an environmentalist, we would rather that didn't happen.

嗯，作為一個環保人士，我們不希望這種事情發生

It's okay on frapped-out agricultural land.

這個地方還可以開發成農業區

Solar's wonderful on rooftops.

太陽能電版可以放在屋頂上

But out in the landscape,

若在平地上

one gigawatt is on the order of 50 sq. mi.

蓋十億瓦特的太陽能電廠

of bulldozed desert.

就需要剷平50平方英里的沙漠

When you add all these things up --

把這些成本加一加

Saul Griffith did the numbers and figured out

薩羅•格里菲斯做了一些統計

what it would take

如果想要

to get 13 clean

產生13太瓦（1太瓦=10兆瓦）

terawatts of energy

的潔淨能源

from wind, solar and biofuels,

像是來自風、太陽能、或是生質燃料

and that area would be roughly the size the United States,

大概需要一整個美國的土地面積

an area he refers to as "Renewistan."

這種地區叫「再生能源區」（註：Renewistan）

A guy who's added all this up very well is David Mackay,

有個叫大衛•麥凱的人，細算出這些成本

a physicist in England,

來自英格蘭的物理學家

and in his wonderful book, "Sustainable Energy," among other things,

在他的暢銷著作《永續能源》中

he says, "I'm not trying to be pro-nuclear. I'm just pro-arithmetic."

裡面提到「我不是支持核能，我只是喜歡算術」

(Laughter)

(笑聲)

In terms of weapons,

如果談到武器方面

the best disarmament tool so far is nuclear energy.

最棒的裁軍方式就是核能發電了

We have been taking down

我們已經拆除了許多

the Russian warheads,

俄國的核子彈頭

turning it into electricity.

然後把它轉為發電用

10 percent of American electricity

美國有10%的發電量

comes from decommissioned warheads.

就是來自這些俄國的核子武器

We haven't even started the American stockpile.

我們甚至還沒使用自己的退役核子彈頭

I think of most interest to a TED audience

我想在場的聽眾都應該有興趣

would be the new generation of reactors

見證新一代的核子反應爐

that are very small,

它非常小

down around 10

可以產生10兆瓦特

to 125 megawatts.

到125兆瓦特的電量

This is one from Toshiba.

這是東芝研發的（Toshiba）

Here's one that the Russians are already building that floats on a barge.

俄國人利用它來作為貨運船的動力來源

And that would be very interesting in the developing world.

這對開發中國家來說，是很有意思的

Typically, these things are put in the ground.

一般而言，這種設備用在陸地上比較多

They're referred to as nuclear batteries.

這就像核能電池

They're incredibly safe,

它非常安全

weapons proliferation-proof and all the rest of it.

核武器的擴散會因此得到緩和

Here is a commercial version from New Mexico

這是一個商業化的核能電池

called the Hyperion,

由新墨西哥州的 Hyperion 企業所研發

and another one from Oregon called NuScale.

這個是由奧勒崗州的 NuScale 企業所研發

Babcock & Wilcox that make nuclear reactors ...

Babcock & Wilcox 是製作核子反應爐的公司

here's an integral fast reactor.

這是一個快速反應器

Thorium reactor that Nathan Myhrvold's involved in.

前微軟技術長，內森•麥沃爾德也投資發展釷反應器

The governments of the world are going to have to decide

這世界上的一些政府都必須決定

that coal needs to be made expensive, and these will go ahead.

要讓煤炭越來越貴，還是發展核能

And here's the future.

這將是未來值得關注的地方

(Applause)

(掌聲)

CA: Okay. Okay.

很好，很好

(Applause)

(掌聲)

So arguing against,

接下來，反方辯士

a man who's been at the nitty-gritty heart

他總是陳述事實真相，擁有堅毅的心

of the energy debate and the climate change debate for years.

這幾年來，他參與了許多能源與氣候變遷議題的討論

In 2000, he discovered that soot

在2000年時，他發現了煤煙

was probably the second leading cause of global warming, after CO2.

可能是僅次於二氧化碳的暖化元兇之一

His team have been making detailed calculations

他的研究團隊

of the relative impacts

針對各種發電方式的環境影響

of different energy sources.

做了詳細的計算

His first time at TED, possibly a disadvantage -- we shall see --

這是他第一次出席 TED 大會，也許比較吃虧，看他表現如何

from Stanford,

來自史丹佛大學的

Professor Mark Jacobson. Good luck.

馬克•雅各布森教授。祝好運

Mark Jacobson: Thank you.

謝謝

(Applause)

(掌聲)

So my premise here is that nuclear energy

我的認定是，核能

puts out more carbon dioxide,

會製造更多二氧化碳

puts out more air pollutants,

更多的空氣污染

enhances mortality more and takes longer to put up

增加死亡率，而且相較於風力、太陽能

than real renewable energy systems,

地熱能、潮汐能等等再生能源

namely wind, solar,

核能需要更長的

geothermal power, hydro-tidal wave power.

建造時間

And it also enhances nuclear weapons proliferation.

核能發電也會增加核子武器的擴散

So let's just start by looking at the

讓我們先來觀察

CO2 emissions from the life cycle.

各種發電廠生命周期的二氧化碳排放量

CO2e emissions are equivalent emissions

CO2e是指（註：CO2e = 二氧化碳等價量）

of all the greenhouse gases and particles

那些會造成地球暖化的

that cause warming,

溫室氣體、微粒（註：溫室氣體有6～7種）

and converted to CO2.

把它們轉換成等效的CO2排放量

And if you look, wind and concentrated solar

你能發現，風力和太陽能

have the lowest CO2 emissions, if you look at the graph.

擁有最低的二氧化碳排放量

Nuclear -- there are two bars here.

看到核能的那處，顯示2個直條圖

One is a low estimate, and one is a high estimate.

一條是估計最低排放量，另一個是最高估計量

The low estimate is the nuclear energy industry

最低估計量是

estimate of nuclear.

核能產業人員計算的

The high is the average of 103

最高的估計量是來自

scientific, peer-reviewed studies.

103個科學研究報告的平均數值

And this is just the

這裡只計算

CO2 from the life cycle.

發電廠從使用到廢棄所產生的二氧化碳

If we look at the delays,

建造一座核能電廠，如果有點延誤的話

it takes between 10 and 19 years

從營運的事前規劃

to put up a nuclear power plant

到電廠的建造完成

from planning to operation.

大概需要10到19年

This includes about three and a half to six years

取得土地的許可

for a site permit.

大概就要 3.5 年到 6 年

and another two and a half to four years

還要再花 2.5 年到 4 年

for a construction permit and issue,

去取得建造許可

and then four to nine years for actual construction.

然後再花 4 到 9 年去真正動工建造

And in China, right now,

現在在中國

they're putting up five gigawatts of nuclear.

有5個十億瓦特的核能發電廠

And the average, just for the construction time of these,

平均建造這些核能發電廠所需時間

is 7.1 years

大約是 7.1 年

on top of any planning times.

是整個過程中最漫長的部分

While you're waiting around for your nuclear,

當你在等待使用核能電力時

you have to run the regular electric power grid,

這段過渡期還是要使用一般的電路線

which is mostly coal in the United States and around the world.

這表示要繼續使用煤炭發電

And the chart here shows the difference between

這張圖表顯示了如果建造核能，或是其他電廠

the emissions from the regular grid,

像是風力、集光式太陽能、光電太陽能

resulting if you use nuclear, or anything else,

使用前的建造時間所產生的

versus wind, CSP or photovoltaics.

溫室氣體排放量

Wind takes about two to five years on average,

風力發電平均需要 2 到 5 年的建造時間

same as concentrated solar and photovoltaics.

跟集光式太陽能和光電太陽能一樣

So the difference is the opportunity cost

所以這種機會成本，就是使用核能與

of using nuclear versus wind, or something else.

其他發電方式的差異之處

So if you add these two together, alone,

把使用核能跟風力的機會成本相比，

you can see a separation

甚至把任 2 種的機會成本加起來

that nuclear puts out at least nine to 17 times

核能發電所造成的二氧化碳排放量

more CO2 equivalent emissions than wind energy.

都至少比風力高達 9 倍到 17 倍

And this doesn't even account

這些甚至還沒計算

for the footprint on the ground.

核能電廠所要佔據的土地面積

If you look at the air pollution health effects,

若你想看看空氣污染對人體健康的影響

this is the number of deaths per year in 2020

這張圖顯示到2020年時

just from vehicle exhaust.

每年因汽車排放物致死的人數

Let's say we converted all the vehicles in the United States

假設我們將全美的汽車

to battery electric vehicles, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles

都換成電池動力、氫燃料電池車

or flex fuel vehicles run on E85.

或是混合燃料等等不同燃料來驅動

Well, right now in the United States,

在美國，每年因空污死亡的人數

50 to 100,000 people die per year from air pollution,

隨空汙來源的不同，死亡人數有50人到10萬人不等

and vehicles are about 25,000 of those.

汽車的空污大約會導致2萬5千人喪命

In 2020, the number will go down to 15,000

不過到了2020年，因為交通工具的改善

due to improvements.

這個數字會降到1萬5千人

And so, on the right, you see gasoline emissions,

圖表最右邊，是到2020年