I was excited to be a partof the “Dream” theme,
and then I found out I’m leading off the the nightmare a section of it
and… and certainly
there are things about the climate crisis that qualify
and I have some bad news,
but I have a lot more good news,
I’m going to propose three questions.
And the answer to the first one necessarily involves little bad news,
但别泄气 因为第二 三个问题的答案
but hang on, because the answers to the second and third questions really
are very positive.
So the first question is do we really have to change,
and of course
the Apollo mission among other things
changed the environmental movement
really launched the modern environmental movement.
18 months after this earth rised picture was first seen on earth,
the first Earth day was organized,
and we learned a lot about ourselves
looking back at our planet from space.
And one of the things that we learned
confirmed what the scientists have long told us
one of the most essential facts about
the climate crisis has to do with the sky.
As this picture illustrates
the sky is not the vast and limitless expanse it appears when we look up from the ground,
it is a very thin shell of atmosphere surrounding the planet,
that right now is the open sewer
for our industrial civilization as it’s currently organized.
We are spewing 110 million tons of heat
trapping global warming pollution into it every 24 hours,
free of charge, go ahead.
And there are many sources of the greenhouse gases
I’m certainly not going to go through them all
I’m going to focus on the main one.
这涉及到农业 饮食 人口
But agriculture is involved, diet is involved, population is involved,
涉及森林 运输 海洋 冻土融化的管理
management of forests, transportation, the oceans, the melting of the permafrost,
But I’m going to focus on the heart of the problem
which is the fact that we still rely on
dirty carbon-based fuels for 85% of all the energy
that our world burns every year.
You can see from this image that after World War two,
the emission rates started really accelerating.
and the accumulated amount of manmade global warming pollution
that is up in the atmosphere.
now traps as much extra heat energy as would be
released by four hundred thousand Hiroshima class atomic bombs exploding
every 24 hours 365 days a year
事实一再表明 保守说 这就是事实
fact-checked over and over again, conservative, it’s the truth.
现在 它是一个大行星 但是
Now it’s a big planet, but…
That is a lot of energy,
particularly when you multiply it 400,000 times per day.
And all that extra heat energy is heating up the atmosphere,
the whole earth system.
let’s look at the atmosphere,
this is a depiction of
what we used to think of as the normal distribution of temperatures
the white represent normal temperature days
1951 to 1980 arbitrarily chosen,
the blue are cooler than average days,
the red are warmer than average days.
But the entire curve has moved to the right in the 1980s,
you’ll see in the lower right hand corner,
the appearance of statistically significant numbers
of extremely hot days.
In the 90s, the curve shifted further
and in the last ten years,
you see the extremely hot days are now more numerous
than the cooler than average days.
In fact they are 150 times more common
on the surface of the earth than they were just thirty years ago,
So we’re having record-breaking temperatures.
14 of the 15 hottest years ever measured with instruments
have been in this young century
and the hottest of all was last year.
Last month was the 371 month in a row warmer
than the 20th century average,
and the for the first time not only the warmest January,
but for the first time
it was more than two degrees Fahrenheit warmer than the average.
These higher temperatures are having an effect on
animals, plants, people ecosystems.
but on a global basis,
93% of all the extra heat energy is trapped in the oceans.
And the scientists can measure the heat buildup much more precisely now at all depths
测量热量的发展 深海 洋中 水下百米
deep, mid-ocean, the first few hundred meters.
and this too is accelerating.
It goes back more than a century
and more than half of the increase
has been in the last 19 years.
This has consequences, first-order consequence,
The ocean based storms gets stronger,
super typhoon Haiyan went over areas of the Pacific
five-and-a-half degrees Fahrenheit warmer than normal
before it slammed into Tacloban,
as the most destructive storm ever to make landfall.
Pope Francis who has made such a difference
to this whole issue visited Tacloban right after that.
that superstorm Sandy went over areas of the Atlantic nine degrees warmer than normal.
before slamming into New York and New Jersey.
the second-order consequences are affecting all of us right now
the warmer oceans are evaporating
much more water vapor into the skies.
Average humidity Worldwide’s gone up more than four percent,
And it creates these atmospheric rivers,
The Brazilian scientists call them flying rivers,
and they funnel all of that extra water vapor over the land
where storm conditions trigger
these massive record-breaking downpours.
this is from Montana,
take a look at this storm last August
as it moves over Tucson Arizona,
It literally splashes off the city.
These downpours are really unusual.
去年七月 在德克萨斯州 休斯顿
Last July in Houston Texas,
it rained for two days 162 billion gallons,
that represents more than two days of the full
flow of Niagara Falls in the middle of the city,
which was of course paralyzed.
these record downpours are creating
historic floods and mudslides,
this one is from Chile last year,
and you’ll see that warehouse go going by
their oil tanker cars going by.
This is from Spain last September,
you could call this the running of the cars and trucks I guess.
Every night on the TV news now is like
a nature hike through the book of Revelation.
I mean, really,
the insurance industry has certainly noticed the losses have been mounting up,
they’re not under any illusions about what’s happening,
and the causality requires a moment of the discussion.
We’re used to thinking of linear cause and linear effect,
one cause one effect,
this is systemic causation
As the great Kevin Trenberth says,
all storms are different now,
there’s so much extra energy in the atmosphere,
there’s so much extra water vapor,
every storm is different now.
So the same extra heat pulls
the soil moisture out of the ground
and causes these deeper longer more pervasive, droughts
and many of them are underway right now,
It dries out the vegetation and causes more fires in the western part of North America.
there’s certainly been evidence of that a lot of them,
more lightning as the heat energy builds up
there’s a considerable amount of additional lightning also.
These climate-related disasters
also have geopolitical consequences and create instability.
The climate-related historic drought that started in Syria in 2006
destroyed 60% of the farms in Syria,
killed 80% of the livestock,
and drove 1.5 million climate refugeesinto the cities of Syria,
where they collided with another1.5 million refugees
from the Iraq War.
And along with other factors,that opened the gates of Hell
that people are trying to close now.
The US Defense Department has long warned
of consequences from the climate crisis,
including refugees, including food and water shortages
and pandemic disease.
Right now we’re seeing microbial diseases
from the tropics spread to the higher latitudes;
the transportation revolution has hada lot to do with this.
But the changing conditionschange the latitudes and the areas
where these microbial diseasescan become endemic
and change the range of the vectors,like mosquitoes and ticks that carry them.
The Zika epidemic now —
we’re better positioned in North America
because it’s still a little too cooland we have a better public health system.
But when women in some regionsof South and Central America
are advised not to get pregnantfor two years —
that’s something new,that ought to get our attention.
The Lancet, one of the two greatestmedical journals in the world,
last summer labeled thisa medical emergency now.
And there are many factors because of it.
This is also connectedto the extinction crisis.
We’re in danger of losing 50 percentof all the living species on earth
by the end of this century.
And already, land-based plants and animals
are now moving towards the poles
at an average rate of 15 feet per day.
Speaking of the North Pole,
last December 29, the same storm
that caused historic flooding in the American Midwest,
raised temperatures at the North Pole
50 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than normal,
causing the thawing of the North Pole
in the middle of the long,dark, winter, polar night.
And when the land-based iceof the Arctic melts,
it raises sea level.
Paul Nicklen’s beautiful photographfrom Svalbard illustrates this.
It’s more dangerous coming off Greenland
and particularly, Antarctica.
The 10 largest risk citiesfor sea-level rise by population
are mostly in South and Southeast Asia.
When you measure it by assets at risk,number one is Miami:
three and a half trillion dollars at risk.
Number three: New York and Newark.
I was in Miami last fall during the supermoon,
one of the highest high-tide days.
And there were fish from the oceanswimming in some of the streets
of Miami Beach and Fort Lauderdale and Del Rey.
And this happens regularlyduring the highest-tide tides now.
Not with rain — they call it”sunny-day flooding.”
It comes up through the storm sewers.
And the Mayor of Miami speaks for many
when he says it is long past time
this can be viewed through a partisan lens.
This is a crisis that’s getting worse day by day.
We have to move beyond partisanship.
And I want to take a momentto honor these House Republicans —
who had the courage last fall
to step out and take a political risk,
by telling the truthabout the climate crisis.
So the cost of the climatecrisis is mounting up,
there are many of these aspectsI haven’t even mentioned.
It’s an enormous burden.
I’ll mention just one more,
because the World Economic Forumlast month in Davos,
after their annual survey of 750 economists,
said the climate crisis is nowthe number one risk
to the global economy.
So you get central bankers
like Mark Carney, the headof the UK Central Bank,
saying the vast majorityof the carbon reserves are unburnable.
I’m not going to remind you what happenedwith subprime mortgages,
but it’s the same thing.
If you look at all of the carbon fuelsthat were burned
since the beginningof the industrial revolution,
this is the quantity burnedin the last 16 years.
Here are all the ones that are provenand left on the books,
28 trillion dollars.
The International Energy Agencysays only this amount can be burned.
So the rest, 22 trillion dollars —
Risk to the global economy.
That’s why divestment movementmakes practical sense
and is not just a moral imperative.
So the answer to the first question,”Must we change?”
答案是 是的 必须改变
is yes, we have to change.
Second question, “Can we change?”
This is the exciting news!
The best projectionsin the world 16 years ago
were that by 2010, the worldwould be able to install
30 gigawatts of wind capacity.
We beat that markby 14 and a half times over.
We see an exponential curvefor wind installations now.
We see the cost coming down dramatically.
在一些国家 如德国 一所发电厂
Some countries — take Germany,an industrial powerhouse
with a climate not that differentfrom Vancouver’s, by the way —
one day last December,
got 81 percent of all its energyfrom renewable resources,
mainly solar and wind.
A lot of countries are gettingmore than half on an average basis.
More good news:
energy storage,from batteries particularly,
is now beginning to take off
because the cost has beencoming down very dramatically
to solve the intermittency problem.
With solar, the news is evenmore exciting!
The best projections 14 years agowere that we would install
one gigawatt per year by 2010.
When 2010 came around,we beat that mark by 17 times over.
Last year, we beat it by 58 times over.
This year, we’re on trackto beat it 68 times over.
We’re going to win this.
We are going to prevail.
The exponential curve on solaris even steeper and more dramatic.
When I came to this stage 10 years ago,
this is where it was.
We have seen a revolutionary breakthrough
in the emergenceof these exponential curves.
And the cost has come down10 percent per year for 30 years.
And it’s continuing to come down.
Now, the business communityhas certainly noticed this,
because it’s crossingthe grid parity point.
Cheaper solar penetration ratesare beginning to rise.
Grid parity is understoodas that line, that threshold,
below which renewable electricityis cheaper than electricity
from burning fossil fuels.
That threshold is a little bitlike the difference
between 32 degrees Fahrenheitand 33 degrees Fahrenheit,
or zero and one Celsius.
It’s a difference of more than one degree,
it’s the difference between ice and water.
And it’s the difference between marketsthat are frozen up,
and liquid flows of capitalinto new opportunities for investment.
This is the biggestnew business opportunity
in the history of the world,
and two-thirds of itis in the private sector.
We are seeing an explosionof new investment.
Starting in 2010, investments globally
in renewable electricity generation surpassed fossils.
The gap has been growing ever since.
The projections for the futureare even more dramatic,
even though fossil energyis now still subsidized
at a rate 40 times larger than renewables.
And by the way, if you addthe projections for nuclear on here,
particularly if you assumethat the work many are doing
to try to break through to saferand more acceptable,
more affordable forms of nuclear,
this could change even more dramatically.
So is there any precedentfor such a rapid adoption
of a new technology?
Well, there are many,but let’s look at cell phones.
In 1980, AT&T, then Ma Bell,
commissioned McKinsey to doa global market survey of those
clunky new mobile phonesthat appeared then.
“How many can we sellby the year 2000?” they asked.
McKinsey came back and said, “900,000.”
And sure enough,when the year 2000 arrived,
they did sell 900,000 –in the first three days.
And for the balance of the year,they sold 120 times more.
And now there are more cell connectionsthan there are people in the world.
So, why were they not only wrong,but way wrong?
我一直在问自己 为什么？ [笑声]
I’ve asked that question myself, “Why?” (Laughter)
And I think the answer is in three parts.
首先 质量上升 成本下降的速度
First, the cost came down much fasterthan anybody expected,
even as the quality went up.
And low-income countries, placesthat did not have a landline grid —
they leap-frogged to the new technology.
The big expansion has beenin the developing counties.
So what about the electricity gridsin the developing world?
Well, not so hot.
And in many areas, they don’t exist.
There are more peoplewithout any electricity at all in India
than the entire populationof the United States of America.
So now we’re getting this:
solar panels on grass huts
and new business modelsthat make it affordable.
Muhammad Yunus financedthis one in Bangladesh with micro-credit.
This is a village market.
Bangladesh is now the fastest-deployingcountry in the world:
two systems per minuteon average, night and day.
And we have all we need:
enough energy from the Suncomes to the earth
every hour to supply the full world’senergy needs for an entire year.
It’s actually a little bitless than an hour.
So the answer to the second question,”Can we change?”
is clearly “Yes.”
And it’s an ever-firmer “yes.”
Last question, “Will we change?”
Paris really was a breakthrough,
some of the provisions are binding
and the regular reviews will matter a lot.
But nations aren’t waiting,they’re going ahead.
China has already announcedthat starting next year,
they’re adopting a nationwidecap and trade system.
They will likely link upwith the European Union.
The United States has already been changing.
All of these coal plants were proposed
in the next 10 years and canceled.
All of these existingcoal plants were retired.
All of these coal plants have hadtheir retirement announced.
All of them — canceled.
We are moving forward.
Last year — if you look atall of the investment
in new electricity generationin the United States,
almost three-quarterswas from renewable energy,
mostly wind and solar.
We are solving this crisis.
The only question is:how long will it take to get there?
So, it matters that a lotof people are organizing
to insist on this change.
Almost 400,000 peoplemarched in New York City
before the UN special session on this.
Many thousands, tens of thousands,
marched in cities around the world.
And so, I am extremely optimistic.
As I said before,we are going to win this.
I’ll finish with this story.
When I was 13 years old,
I heard that proposal by President Kennedy
to land a person on the Moonand bring him back safely in 10 years.
And I heard adults of that day and time say,
“That’s reckless, expensive, may well fail.”
But eight years and two months later,
in the moment that Neil Armstrongset foot on the Moon,
there was great cheer that went upin NASA’s mission control in Houston.
Here’s a little-known fact about that:
the average age of the systems engineers,
the controllers in the room that day, was 26,
which means, among other things,
their age, when they heardthat challenge, was 18.
We now have a moral challenge
that is in the tradition of othersthat we have faced.
One of the greatest poetsof the last century in the US,
wrote a line that has stayed with me:
“After the final ‘no,’there comes a ‘yes,’
and on that ‘yes’,the future world depends.”
When the abolitionists started their movement,
they met with no after no after no.
And then came a yes.
The Women’s Suffrage and Women’s Rights Movement
met endless no’s, until finally,there was a yes.
The Civil Rights Movement,the movement against apartheid,
and more recently, the movementfor gay and lesbian rights
here in the United States and elsewhere.
After the final “no” comes a “yes.”
When any great moral challengeis ultimately resolved
into a binary choicebetween what is right and what is wrong,
the outcome is fore-ordainedbecause of who we are as human beings.
Ninety-nine percent of us,that is where we are now
and it is why we’re going to win this.
We have everything we need.
Some still doubt that we havethe will to act,
but I say the will to act is itselfa renewable resource.
Thank you very much.
You’ve got this incredible combination of skills.
You’ve got this scientist mindthat can understand
the full range of issues,
and the ability to turn itinto the most vivid language.
No one else can do that,that’s why you led this thing.
It was amazing to see it 10 years ago,it was amazing to see it now.
Well, you’re nice to say that, Chris.
But honestly, I have a lot of really good friends
in the scientific communitywho are incredibly patient
and who will sit thereand explain this stuff to me
over and over and over again
until I can get itinto simple enough language
that I can understand it.
And that’s the key to tryingto communicate.
CA: So, your talk. First part: terrifying,
second part: incredibly hopeful.
How do we know that all those graphs,all that progress, is enough
to solve what you showed in the first part?
AG: I think that the crossing —
you know, I’ve only beenin the business world for 15 years.
But one of the things I’ve learnedis that apparently it matters
if a new product or service is more expensive
than the incumbent, or cheaper than.
Turns out, it makes a differenceif it’s cheaper than.
And when it crosses that line,
then a lot of things really change.
We are regularly surprisedby these developments.
The late Rudi Dornbusch,the great economist said, you know,
“Things take longer to happenthan you think they will,
and then they happen much fasterthan you thought they could.”
I really think that’s where we are.
现在一些人用 太阳能点 这个词
Some people are using the phrase”The Solar Singularity” now,
meaning when it getsbelow the grid parity,
unsubsidized in most places,
then it’s the default choice.
Now, in one of the presentationsyesterday, the jitney thing,
there is an effort to useregulations to slow this down.
And I just don’t think it’s going to work.
There’s a woman in Atlanta, Debbie Dooley,
who’s the Chairmanof the Atlanta Tea Party.
They enlisted herin this effort to put a tax
on solar panels and regulations.
And she had just putsolar panels on her roof
and she didn’t understand the request.
(Laughter) And so she went and formedan alliance with the Sierra Club
and they formed a new organizationcalled the Green Tea Party.
(Laughter) (Applause) And they defeated the proposal.
So, finally, the answerto your question is,
this sounds a little cornyand maybe it’s a cliché,
but 10 years ago — and Christianareferred to this —
there are people in this audience
who played an incredibly significant role
in generating those exponential curves.
And it didn’t work out economicallyfor some of them,
but it kick-startedthis global revolution.
And what people in this audience do now
with the knowledgethat we are going to win this.
But it matters a lot how fast we win it.
Al Gore, that was incredibly powerful.
If this turns out to be the year,
that the partisan thing changes,
as you said, it’s no longera partisan issue,
but you bring along peoplefrom the other side together,
backed by science, backed by these kindsof investment opportunities,
backed by reason, emm… you win the day boy,
that’s really exciting.
Thank you so much for bringing me back to TED.