and it's getting heavier

全球氣候變遷已是個沉重的話題，

because we're understanding

並有愈加沉重之勢，

that we need to do more than we are.

因為我們開始意識到

We're understanding, in fact,

我們現在所做的努力還遠遠不夠。

that those of us who live in the developed world

事實上，我們開始意識到

need to be really pushing towards eliminating our emissions.

生活在發達國家的我們

That's, to put it mildly, not what's on the table now.

需要努力減少廢氣排放。

And it tends to feel a little overwhelming

而这想法，說得婉轉些，还未被列入議程。

when we look at what is there in reality today

當我們著眼於現今的實際面

and the magnitude of the problem that we face.

和當前的艱巨難題，

And when we have overwhelming problems in front of us,

心头便被不安和彷徨籠罩。

we tend to seek simple answers.

而當我們面對問題不知所措時

And I think this is what we've done with climate change.

就容易「頭痛醫頭，腳痛醫腳」。

We look at where the emissions are coming from --

我認為我們處理氣候變化的方式就是這樣。

they're coming out of our tailpipes and smokestacks and so forth,

我們環顧四周尋找廢氣排放的源頭 ——

and we say, okay, well the problem is

它們從排氣管中來，從工廠煙囪里來……

that they're coming out of fossil fuels that we're burning,

然後我們就斷言，好了，病灶發現嘍

so therefore, the answer must be

廢氣就來自那些礦物燃料，

to replace those fossil fuels with clean sources of energy.

所以呢，要解決這個問題，

And while, of course, we do need clean energy,

就把那些礦物燃料替換成清潔能源好了。

I would put to you that it's possible

而此時，當然啦，我們又確實需要綠色能源，

that by looking at climate change

但我想告訴你們，

as a clean energy generation problem,

若單是認為使用綠色能源

we're in fact setting ourselves up

便能解決氣候變遷的問題，

not to solve it.

我們是在作繭自縛，

And the reason why

別指望解決問題。

is that we live on a planet

因為

that is rapidly urbanizing.

我們寄居的這個星球

That shouldn't be news to any of us.

其都市化進程相當迅猛。

However, it's hard sometimes

或許這對大家來說是老調重彈。

to remember the extent of that urbanization.

但有時候，大家對於

By mid-century,

都市化所能達到的程度沒有概念。

we're going to have about eight billion -- perhaps more -- people

再過50年，

living in cities or within a day's travel of one.

將有大約80億人口——也許更多——

We will be an overwhelmingly urban species.

生活在城市或者與城市相隔不出一天車程的地方。

In order to provide

屆時我們將成為一個難以被駕馭的「城市兵團」。

the kind of energy that it would take

為了

for eight billion people living in cities

讓那八十億人的日子

that are even somewhat like the cities

過得

that those of us in the global North live in today,

有那麼丁點兒

we would have to generate

像當今北半球城里人的影子，

an absolutely astonishing amount of energy.

我們都必須生產

It may be possible

數量十分驚人的能源。

that we are not even able

而且很可能

to build that much clean energy.

我們無法製造出

So if we're seriously talking about tackling climate change

那樣多的清潔能源。

on an urbanizing planet,

因此如果我們真的希望在城市化進程中

we need to look somewhere else for the solution.

探討應對大氣變遷的方案的話，

The solution, in fact, may be closer to hand than we think,

我們需要改變視角，另闢蹊徑。

because all of those cities we're building

而那個我們夢寐以求的方案，可能比我們想像的要來得容易。

are opportunities.

因為那些處於雛形階段的城市

Every city determines to a very large extent

都是我們的機會。

the amount of energy used by its inhabitants.

每一個城市在很大程度上

We tend to think of energy use as a behavioral thing --

都決定了其居民所消耗的能源量。

I choose to turn this light switch on --

我們習慣性地認為自己可以主觀控制能源的消耗——

but really, enormous amounts of our energy use

譬如「是我想把這燈打開」——

are predestined

但事實上，有很大一部份能源的消耗

by the kinds of communities and cities that we live in.

是由

I won't show you very many graphs today,

我們居住的社區、城市決定的。

but if I can just focus on this one for a moment,

我今天不打算向你們展示很多圖表，

it really tells us a lot of what we need to know --

但面前的這一張值得大家關注，

which is, quite simply,

圖中有一些我們應該瞭解的訊息——

that if you look, for example, at transportation,

很明顯，

a major category of climate emissions,

就拿圖表上「交通工具」——

there is a direct relationship

即大氣廢物的主要排放源——來說，

between how dense a city is

一個城市

and the amount of climate emissions

其人口、建施的密度

that its residents spew out into the air.

與其居民製造的排放物之間

And the correlation, of course,

有著直接聯繫。

is that denser places tend to have lower emissions --

這關聯，從圖上可以看出，

which isn't really all that difficult to figure out, if you think about it.

即是：密度越大，其排放物反而愈少——

Basically,

仔細想想，這其實也不難理解。

we substitute, in our lives,

平時生活中，

access to the things we want.

我們為得到自己想要的東西

We go out there and we hop in our cars

而驅車數里。

and we drive from place to place.

一出門我們就坐上車，

And we're basically using mobility to get the access we need.

穿梭于一個又一個地點間。

But when we live in a denser community,

基本上，我們做什麽都離不開車。

suddenly what we find, of course,

但倘若我們居住在一個較密集的社區，

is that the things we need are close by.

突然間，我們會發現，

And since the most sustainable trip

那些我們需要的東西近在咫尺。

is the one that you never had to make in the first place,

而且最划算的旅行

suddenly our lives become instantly more sustainable.

就是「呆在原地打轉兒」，

And it is possible, of course,

突然間，我們會發現日子過得更加經濟划算了。

to increase the density of the communities around us.

而當然了，

Some places are doing this with new eco districts,

提高社區的密度是完全有可能的。

developing whole new sustainable neighborhoods,

一些地方已經開始試行生態區了，

which is nice work if you can get it,

他們正在那裡打造一種全新的可持續發展的社區模式，

but most of the time, what we're talking about is, in fact,

如果你能理解，便知道這樣做的好處。

reweaving the urban fabric that we already have.

但大多數時候，我們所討論的是，

So we're talking about things like infill development:

如何重新雕琢城市的肌理。

really sharp little changes

因此我們所關注的是諸如「填充式開發」這類問題：

to where we have buildings, where we're developing.

這意味著我們不會對

Urban retrofitting:

現有的房屋和正在開發中的地段做大幅度改動。

creating different sorts of spaces and uses

對城市進行翻新：

out of places that are already there.

即在現有的條件下

Increasingly, we're realizing

再額外開發一些多功能的空間。

that we don't even need to densify an entire city.

越來越多的人開始認識到

What we need instead is an average density

我們沒必要將城市每一個角落的密度都加大。

that rises to a level

我們需要做的只是將整座城市的

where we don't drive as much and so on.

平均密度提升到一個水平

And that can be done

從而使我們不必像現在這樣依賴汽車。

by raising the density in very specific spots a whole lot.

而要實現以上的目標

So you can think of it as tent poles

只需要大幅度提升某一些特定場所的密度即可。

that actually raise the density of the entire city.

你可以把這想像成

And we find that when we do that,

是一些帳篷杆將整個城市的密度撐高了。

we can, in fact, have a few places that are really hyper-dense

而當我們真的這樣做時，

within a wider fabric of places

我們就會發現，其實在一個

that are perhaps a little more comfortable

相較寬鬆、令人舒服的大環境中，

and achieve the same results.

哪怕只有少部份具有高密度的空間，

Now we may find that there are places that are really, really dense

我們也可以獲得相同的成效。

and still hold onto their cars,

但現在我們可能會發現有些空間的密度已經相當高了，

but the reality is that, by and large,

但人們還是沒有擯棄汽車，

what we see when we get a lot of people together with the right conditions

其實，總的來說，情況是這樣的，

is a threshold effect,

當我們在適宜的條件下將人口分佈安排得更加緊湊時，

where people simply stop driving as much,

接下來便會產生「門檻效應(threshold effect)」，

and increasingly, more and more people,

這時人們一開始是變得「不那麼依賴車」，

if they're surrounded by places that make them feel at home,

爾後，當越來越多的人

give up their cars altogether.

被有著家一般感覺的環境所包圍時，

And this is a huge, huge energy savings,

他們就會「戒掉」汽車。

because what comes out of our tailpipe

而這將節約大量的能源。

is really just the beginning of the story

因為從我們的尾氣管中所排放出的

with climate emissions from cars.

還僅僅是汽車所產生的

We have the manufacture of the car, the disposal of the car,

大氣污染物的一小部份。

all of the parking and freeways and so on.

我們還必須處理汽車的生產和報廢，

When you can get rid of all of those

大量的停車場和高速公路等等。

because somebody doesn't use any of them really,

而當一些人完全不依賴這些事物時，

you find that you can actually cut transportation emissions

我們就可以擺脫它們的影響，

as much as 90 percent.

這時你將發現，你已經將交通工具產生的污染物

And people are embracing this.

減少了90%

All around the world, we're seeing more and more people embrace this walkshed life.

並且，人們很高興能遠離汽車。

People are saying that it's moving from the idea of the dream home

我們可以看到，全世界越來越多的人開始崇尚步行生活。

to the dream neighborhood.

人們都說，那感覺相當于從小小理想之家

And when you layer that over

搬到到了一個大的理想社區

with the kind of ubiquitous communications that we're starting to see,

若將理想之家置入理想社區

what you find is, in fact,

加上便捷的交通網絡，

even more access suffused into spaces.

你就會發現，實際上，

Some of it's transportation access.

我們能獲得的東西變多了。

This is a Mapnificent map that shows me, in this case,

而其中一部份就是新的交通方式和路线。

how far I can get from my home in 30 minutes

這是一張Mapnificent網路地圖，它指示出(譯者注：Mapnificent為應用軟體)

using public transportation.

從我家出發，借助於公共交通工具，

Some of it is about walking. It's not all perfect yet.

30分鐘之內我能抵達的地方。

This is Google Walking Maps.

當然其中有些地方是按步行來算的。這軟體尚未臻完美。

I asked how to do the greater Ridgeway,

這張是來自「Google 步行地圖( Google Walking Maps)」。

and it told me to go via Guernsey.

我用它來查尋到Great Ridgeway的路線，

It did tell me that this route

而它告訴我應該從格恩西島(Guernsey)走。

maybe missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths, though.

它還告訴我這條路線

(Laughter)

可能沒有人行道。

But the technologies are getting better,

(笑)

and we're starting to really kind of crowdsource this navigation.

但科技總在進步，

And as we just heard earlier,

我們開始擴充導航系統的資料

of course, we're also learning how to put information on dumb objects.

而正如我們早先知道的，

Things that don't have any wiring in them at all,

我們學著在「不會說話的東西」上標注信息。

we're learning how to include

對沒有任何電線嵌套的東西

in these systems of notation and navigation.

我們也學著將之納入

Part of what we're finding with this

符號和導航的系統。

is that what we thought

這也讓我們發現，

was the major point

我們所認為的

of manufacturing and consumption,

生產與消耗

which is to get a bunch of stuff,

的重點

is not, in fact,

只是『得到一堆的東西』，

how we really live best in dense environments.

而不是，

What we're finding is that what we want

如何能讓我們在密集環境中獲得最優質的生活。

is access to the capacities of things.

我們還發現，其實我們一直想要得到的

My favorite example is a drill. Who here owns a drill, a home power drill?

也只是能物盡其用而已。

Okay. I do too.

我最喜歡拿鑽孔機為例。在座的觀眾誰有家用式鑽孔機啊?

The average home power drill is used somewhere between six and 20 minutes

好，我也有一台。

in its entire lifetime,

在家用鑽孔機的一生中，其平均被使用的時間

depending on who you ask.

是6到20分鐘，

And so what we do is we buy these drills

具體多久則因人而異。

that have a potential capacity of thousands of hours of drill time,

因此我們所做的是將這些

use them once or twice to put a hole in the wall and let them sit.

本可以工作上千個小時的鑽孔機回家，

Our cities, I would put to you,

爾後只用來打一兩個洞，就置之不理了。

are stockpiles of these surplus capacities.

而我們的城市，我可以告訴你們，

And while we could try and figure out

就儲滿了諸如此類的剩餘能量。

new ways to use those capacities --

而當我們嘗試著

such as cooking or making ice sculptures

開發鑽孔機的新功能時——

or even a mafia hit --

譬如說用來炒菜，用來雕冰

what we probably will find

或者是用來做兇器——

is that, in fact, turning those products into services

我們可能會發現

that we have access to when we want them,

其實，更為聰明的辦法是

is a far smarter way to go.

將這些產品的功能多元化，

And in fact, even space itself is turning into a service.

以便我們需要的時候使用。

We're finding that people can share the same spaces,

而事實上，就算是單一空間本身也是一個多功能體。

do stuff with vacant space.

我們發現人們可以共享同一個空間，

Buildings are becoming bundles of services.

可以在空置的地方做任何事情。

So we have new designs

建築已經開始具有多種功能了。

that are helping us take mechanical things that we used to spend energy on --

因此我們的新設計

like heating, cooling etc. --

旨在將那些曾經需要消耗人為能源的機械工作——

and turn them into things that we avoid spending energy on.

諸如加熱，冷卻等等——

So we light our buildings with daylight.

轉化為不需要消耗人為能源的工作。

We cool them with breezes. We heat them with sunshine.

這樣一來，我們得以用日光照明。

In fact, when we use all these things,

以自然風來降溫，以太陽能來加熱。

what we've found is that, in some cases,

而當我們採用這些形式的能源時，

energy use in a building can drop as much as 90 percent.

就會發現，在某些情況下，

Which brings on another threshold effect

一幢建築物所消耗的人為能源能降低90%。

I like to call furnace dumping,

這就帶來下一個「門檻效應(threshold effect)」

which is, quite simply,

我也把它叫做「火爐再見(furnace dumping)」。

if you have a building that doesn't need to be heated with a furnace,

這理解起來很簡單，

you save a whole bunch of money up front.

就是如果你的屋子不需要爐子來提供熱能的話，

These things actually become cheaper to build

你就相當于省了一大筆錢。

than the alternatives.

而就算將這筆錢用在自然能源的採集上，

Now when we look at being able

那也還是有富餘。

to slash our product use, slash our transportation use,

那麼現在我們已經可以

slash our building energy use,

大幅度削減物品消耗，削減交通工具的使用頻率，

all of that is great, but it still leaves something behind.

削減建築物能源的消耗量，

And if we're going to really, truly become sustainable cities,

能做到這樣確實很棒，但仍有一些要素被遺漏了。

we need to think a little differently.

而倘若我們真想讓城市可持續發展，

This is one way to do it.

我們就需要轉換一下思維。

This is Vancouver's propaganda about how green a city they are.

這裡展示的便是其中一種模式。

And certainly lots of people have taken to heart

這是溫哥華(Vancouver)為其綠色城市所做的宣傳。

this idea that a sustainable city is covered in greenery.

而顯然，很多人都認為

So we have visions like this.

一個可持續發展的城市是披滿了綠色植物的。

We have visions like this. We have visions like this.

由此我們就看到了這樣的景象。

Now all of these are fine projects,

這樣的景象，還有

but they really have missed an essential point,

這樣的景象。當然這都是些不錯的企劃，

which is it's not about the leaves above,

但他們真的忽略了一個要點。

it's about the systems below.

那即是不管高層的綠化做得多麼好，

Do they, for instance, capture rainwater

真正的影響則來自下面的設施。

so that we can reduce water use?

譬如說，是否收集雨水

Water is energy intensive.

以便節約水資源？

Do they, perhaps, include green infrastructure,

水的消耗量可謂巨大。

so that we can take runoff

是否包含環保基礎建設，

and water that's going out of our houses

可讓我們將徑流

and clean it and filter it

與生活用水進行

and grow urban street trees?

淨化並過濾

Do they connect us back to the ecosystems around us

和澆灌街邊樹木?

by, for example, connecting us to rivers

這些設施能否維繫我們與周圍的生態系統，

and allowing for restoration?

譬如，讓我們容易接近川流

Do they allow for pollination,

並容許河川復育嗎?

pollinator pathways

這些工程是否考慮到了『授粉』，

that bees and butterflies and such can come back into our cities?

是否有專門之途徑

Do they even take the very waste matter

將傳播花粉的昆蟲引進我們的城市?

that we have from food and fiber and so forth,

工程中有沒有將那些廢棄物，

and turn it back into soil

那些來自食物和纖維等物品的廢棄物，

and sequester carbon --