演讲MP3+双语文稿:我们要像跟踪天气一样跟踪世界的水

听力课堂TED音频栏目主要包括TED演讲的音频MP3及中英双语文稿，供各位英语爱好者学习使用。本文主要内容为演讲MP3+双语文稿:我们要像跟踪天气一样跟踪世界的水，希望你会喜欢！

【演讲者及介绍】Sonaar Luthra

萨纳尔·卢特拉, 水数据牧人。TED的同事Sonaar Luthra正在为水资源建立一个天气服务，以帮助企业和社区管理21世纪的水资源风险。

【演讲主题】我们需要像跟踪天气一样跟踪世界的水

【中英文字幕】

翻译者 Shengmin Huang 校对者Yolanda Zhang

00:12

We need to build a weather service for water. Yet, until we collectively demand accountability, the incentives to fund it will not exist.

我们需要为水资源 建立一个气象服务台。 但在我们能够 一致对此问责前， 它不具备成立的因素。

00:23

The first time I spoke at a conference was here at TED, eight years ago. Fresh out of grad school, little did I know that in those few minutes onstage, I was framing the questions I was going to be asked for the next decade. And, like too many 20-somethings, I expected to solve the world's problems -- more specifically, the world's water problems -- with my technology. I had a lot to learn.

八年前，我正是在TED平台 发表了我的第一次公众演讲。 刚毕业的我未曾想到， 在台上数分钟内罗列的问题， 我将用此后的十年时间 去作答。 而就像许多二十啷当岁的青年， 我期盼自己 能解决世界难题—— 具体来说， 是想用自己的技术 来解决全球水质问题。 我要学的东西还有很多。

00:50

It was seductive, believing that our biggest water quality problems persist because they're so hard to identify. And I presumed that we just needed simpler, faster and more affordable sensors. I was wrong. While it's true that managing tomorrow's water risk is going to require better data and more technology, today we're barely using the little water data that we have. Our biggest water problems persist because of what we don't do and the problems we fail to acknowledge. There's actually little question about what today's water data is telling us to do as a species: we need to conserve more, and we need to pollute less. But today's data is not going to help us forecast the emerging risks facing businesses and markets. It's rapidly becoming useless for that. It used to carry more value, but it's never actually told us with any real accuracy how much water we have or what's in it.

人们容易相信这么个论点： 最严峻的水质问题 依然攻克不下， 是因为水质鉴定非常困难。 我也曾以为 我们只要有了更简单、更快捷、 更便宜的检测器就够了。 我错了。 虽然我们确实需要 更好的数据与更高的技术 来为明日的水质做风险管理， 但今时今日我们都还不能够 充分利用现有的为数不多的数据。 最严峻的水质问题依然攻克不下， 是因为有些事情我们没有做到、 有些问题我们没能察觉。 作为地球上的一个物种， 我们人类能从现有的 水质数据读出的信息也很明确： 我们要节约环保， 我们要减少污染。 但是目前的水质数据 并不能帮助我们预测 即将来临的面对商业与市场的风险。 目前的数据对此愈加一无是处。 此类数据在过去更具价值， 但它们从未准确地告诉过我们 具体的水量 或是水中的成份。

02:28

In 2015, Chennai, India's sixth-largest city, was hit with the worst floods it had seen in a century. Today, its water reservoirs are nearly dry. It took three years to get here, three years of subaverage rainfall. Now, that's faster than most nations tabulate their national water data, including the US. And although there were forecasts that predicted severe shortages of water in Chennai, none of them could actually help us pinpoint exactly when or where this was going to happen. This is a new type of water problem, because the rate at which every aspect of our water cycle changes is accelerating. As a recent UN warning this month revealed, we are now facing one new climate emergency every single week.

2015年，印度的第六大城市，金奈， 遭受了百年来 最严重的洪水袭击。 而今天，那里的水库几近干枯。 仅三年，降雨量低于平均值的三年， 就成了这幅光景。 大多数国家，包括美国， 将全国水资源数据收集制表的速度 都跟不上这样的干枯速度。 而且虽然有过几次 对金奈市水资源短缺的预报， 但它们无一明确指明水资源短缺 会在何时何地发生。 这是一类新的水资源问题， 因为水循环的各个环节 都在加速变化。 正如近期联合国 在本月警告所示， 我们每一周都面临着 一个新的气候危况。

03:26

There are greater uncertainties ahead for water quality. It's rare in most countries for most water bodies to be tested for more than a handful of contaminants in a year. Instead of testing, we use what's called the "dilution model" to manage pollution. Now, imagine I took an Olympic-sized swimming pool, I filled it with fresh water and I added one drop of mercury. That would dilute down to one part per billion mercury, which is well within what the World Health Organization considers safe. But if there was any unforeseen drop in how much water was available -- less groundwater, less stream flow, less water in the pool -- less dilution would take place, and things would get more toxic. So this is how most countries are managing pollution. They use this model to tell them how much pollution is safe. And it has clear weaknesses, but it worked well enough when we had abundant water and consistent weather patterns. Now that we don't, we're going to need to invest and develop new data-collection strategies. But before we do that, we have to start acting on the data we already have.

在水质方面存在着更大的不确定性。 绝大多数国家在一年内 对国内大部分水体 进行污染物检测的次数屈指可数。 我们现在用于污染管控 的方式不是检测， 而是一种名为“稀释模型”的方法。 试想在一个奥运规格的泳池内 注水，并加入一滴水银。 这能将水银稀释至十亿分之一， 也就是在世界卫生组织看来 算是安全的程度。 但如果有这么一滴未被察觉到 的水银滴入地下水含量更少、 流量更弱、 水量更少的游泳池中， 稀释效果就会更弱， 水里的毒性就会更强。 而这就是大多数国家 的污染管理之道。 他们用这个模型告诉人们 什么程度的污染能算安全。 这种方法有着明显的缺陷， 但它在水源充足 与气象规律稳定的条件下 还是能够达到目的。 可现在，条件不允许了， 我们需要投资开发 全新的数据收集方案。 但在我们开始实施前， 我们得从已有的数据着手。

04:34

As many of you may be aware, jet fuel emissions play an enormous role in climate change. What you might not be aware of is that the US Department of Defense is the world's largest consumer of jet fuel. And when they consume jet fuel, they mandate the use of the firefighting foam pictured here, which contains a class of chemicals called PFAS. Nobody uses more of this foam than the US Department of Defense, and every time it's used, PFAS finds its way into our water systems. Globally, militaries have been using this foam since the 1970s. We know PFAS causes cancer, birth defects, and it's now so pervasive in the environment that we seem to find it in nearly every living thing we test, including us. But so far, the US Department of Defense has not been held accountable for PFAS contamination, nor has it been held liable. And although there's an effort underway to phase out these firefighting foams, they're not embracing safer, effective alternatives. They're actually using other PFAS molecules, which may, for all we know, carry worse health consequences.

正如你们许多人所知， 航空燃油排放对气候变化 有着相当程度的影响。 但不为你们所知的是， 美国国防部 正是全球最大的 航空燃油购买方。 在购买航空燃油的同时， 他们还允许使用 图片所示的消防泡沫， 这种泡沫里含有一类叫做PFAS （全氟烷基磺酸盐 ）的化学成分。 在这种消防泡沫的用量上 美国国防部无人能及， 而且每次使用，PFAS都会 以某种方式进入供水系统。 全球各国军队从20世纪70年代起 就开始使用这种消防泡沫了。 我们知道PFAS会导致 癌症、先天性缺陷， 而现在它们在环境中遍布之广， 我们几乎能在 所有生物测试对象中检测到它们， 包括人体。 但是到目前为止，还没人 就PFAS污染一事 向美国国防部问责， 国防部也从未表示过要对此负责。 尽管当局正致力于 逐步淘汰这些灭火泡沫， 但他们并未采用更安全， 更有效的替代方法。 他们实际采用的是 其它的PFAS分子， 就我们所知，这可能会招致 更严重的健康问题。

05:49

So today, government accountability is eroding to the point of elimination, and the risk of liability from water pollution is vanishing. What types of incentives does this create for investing in our water future? Over the past decade, the average early stage global investment in early stage water technology companies has totaled less than 30 million dollars every year. That's 0.12 percent of global venture capital for early stage companies. And public spending is not going up nearly fast enough. And a closer look at it reveals that water is not a priority. In 2014, the US federal government was spending 11 dollars per citizen on water infrastructure, versus 251 dollars on IT infrastructure. So when we don't use the data we have, we don't encourage investment in new technologies, we don't encourage more data collection and we certainly don't encourage investment in securing a water future.

时至今日，政府问责机制 日渐淡化，形同虚设， 这样政府对水质污染担责 的风险也就越来越小了。 这会对我们给水资源的未来做投资 产生什么样的激励？ 在过去的十年里，全球每年针对 一众处于早期阶段的 水资源相关科技公司 的初期平均投资 总数不及三千万美元。 在对全球初期公司的 风险投资里占0.12% 而且公共支出的 增长速度也远跟不上。 再一细看就会发现水资源 并非人们优先考虑的问题。 2014年，美国联邦政府 在供水的基础设施上 为每个公民花费了11美元， 而在信息技术的基础设施上 花费了251美元。 所以如果我们不能 擅用我们现有的数据， 我们就没法鼓励人们为新技术投资， 没法鼓励人们收集更多的数据 自然也没法鼓励人们 为未来的水质安全投资。

07:02

So are we doomed? Part of what I'm still learning is how to balance the doom and the urgency with things we can do, because Greta Thunberg and the Extinction Rebellion don't want our hope -- they want us to act.

人类就这样毁了？ 我目前正研究的其中一个问题， 是如何物尽其用 在毁灭与危急状态间做平衡， 因为格雷塔·图恩伯格 与“反抗灭绝”组织需要的 不是我们的期许， 他们要的是我们的行动。

07:17

So what can we do? It's hard to imagine life without a weather service, but before modern weather forecasting, we had no commercial air travel, it was common for ships to be lost at sea, and a single storm could produce a food shortage. Once we had radio and telegraph networks, all that was necessary to solve these problems was tracking the movement of storms. And that laid the foundation for a global data collection effort, one that every household and every business depends upon today. And this was as much the result of coordinated and consistent data collection as it was the result of producing a culture that saw greater value in openly assessing and sharing everything that it could find out and discover about the risks we face.

那么我们能做什么？ 没有气象台的生活是难以想象的， 但在现代气象预测技术出现之前， 我们是没有商务航空的， 船舶在海洋中迷失屡见不鲜， 光一场风暴 就能造成食物短缺。 而在我们发明了无线电与电报网络后， 我们仅需要跟踪着风暴的动态， 这些问题就迎刃而解了。 这也为全球数据收集 成为当今家家户户、 各行各业都用得上的技术 奠定了基础。 能够创造一种更重视公开评定， 并在面对危机时能就其 所知所见知无不言的文化， 和能够使用相互协调、 持续产生的数据 所带来的结果同样重要。

08:13

A global weather service for water would help us forecast water shortages. It could help us implement rationing well before reservoirs run dry. It could help us detect contamination before it spreads. It could protect our supply chains, secure our food supplies, and, perhaps most importantly, it would enable the precise estimation of risk necessary to insure against it.

建立一个水资源的全球气象服务台 能帮助我们预测水资源短缺； 能帮助我们在水库枯竭之前 就实施定量配给； 能帮助我们在污染扩散之前 就可将其检测出来； 还能保护我们的供应链， 为我们的食品供应把关， 也许最重要的是， 这能精确评估风险， 从而确定必须承担的责任。

08:40

We know we can do this because we've already done it with weather. But it's going to require resources. We need to encourage greater investment in water. Investors, venture capitalists: a portion of your funds and portfolios should be dedicated to water. Nothing is more valuable and, after all, businesses are going to need to understand water risks in order to remain competitive in the world we are entering. Aside from venture capital, there are also lots of promising government programs that encourage economic development through tax incentives.

我们知道这些事情能实现， 因为我们已经实现了气象跟踪。 但这会对资源有要求。 我们得鼓励更多的 对水资源的投资。 投资者们，风险投资家们： 在你们的资金与投资组合中 应该要有一部分用于水资源。 没有什么比这更有价值的了， 毕竟，企业也需要去 了解水资源的风险， 以在今后所处的世界里 保持竞争力。 除了风险投资外， 还有许多有前景的政府计划 通过税收优惠鼓励经济发展。

09:14

A new option in the US that my company is using is called "opportunity zones." They offer favorable tax treatment for investing capital gains in designated distressed and low-income areas. Now, these are areas that are also facing staggering water risk, so this creates crucial incentives to work directly with the communities who need help most.

我们公司正在使用一个叫 “机会区”的美国新政。 美国政府对投资在指定的 贫困地区和低收入地区 所获的资金收益 提供优惠的税收待遇。 要知道，正是这些地区 面临着巨大的水资源风险， 因此这类政策对 “直接致力于最需要帮助的社区” 有着关键性的激励作用。

09:36

And if you're not looking to make this type of investment but you own land in the US, did you know that you can leverage your land to conserve water quality permanently with a conservation easement? You can assign the perpetual right to a local land trust to conserve your land and set specific water quality goals. And if you meet those goals, you can be rewarded with a substantial tax discount every year.

如果你尚未着眼于此类投资 但在美国拥有土地， 你是否知道你能通过‘保育地役权’ 为你的土地获得 永久性的水质保护？ 你可以将这项永久性权利 分配给本地土地信托 从而保护你的土地， 并为水质制定特定的目标。 如果你能达成这些目标， 你就能每年获得大幅税收优惠。

10:06

How many areas could our global community protect through these and other programs? They're powerful because they offer the access to real property necessary to lay the foundation for a global weather service for water. But this can only work if we use these programs as they are intended and not as mere vehicles for tax evasion. When the conservation easement was established, nobody could anticipate how ingrained in environmental movements corporate polluters would become. And we've become accustomed to companies talking about the climate crisis while doing nothing about it. This has undermined the legacy and the impact of these programs, but it also makes them ripe for reclamation. Why not use conservation easements as they were intended, to set and reach ambitious conservation goals? Why not create opportunities in opportunity zones? Because fundamentally, water security requires accountability. Accountability is not corporate polluters sponsoring environmental groups and museums. Those are conflicts of interest.

有多少区域能在 这样与那样的计划下 受到我们全球社区的保护？ 这些计划之所以有影响力， 是因为它们提供了 为“全球水资源气象服务台”奠定基础 所不可或缺的地产的获取方式。 但要达成目的，我们必须 遵循这些计划的本意， 而非仅仅将其用作为避税工具。 在“保育地役权”设立之初， 没人能预料到 企业对环境的污染 会变得如此积重难返。 我们已经习惯了听企业 一边拿气候危机说事， 一边却对此无所作为。 这样的状况已经削弱了那些政府 计划的成效与影响， 但也令各式计划遍地开花。 为何不贯彻“保育地役权”的本意， 以设立并实现伟大的环保目标？ 为何不在"机会区"内创造机会？ 因为根本问题在于， 需要有人为水质安全负责。 负责不是指让污染排放企业 给环境组织 和博物馆投钱。 那些是利益冲突。

11:24

（Applause）

（掌声）

11:30

Accountability is: making the risk of liability too expensive to continue polluting and wasting our water. We can't keep settling for words. It's time to act. And where better to start than with our biggest polluters, particularly the US Department of Defense, which is taxpayer-funded. Who and what are we protecting when US soldiers, their families and the people who live near US military bases abroad are all drinking toxic water? Global security can no longer remain at odds with protecting our planet or our collective health. Our survival depends on it.

负责是指： 让承担责任的风险昂贵之极， 从而不敢继续污染和浪费我们的水。 我们不能再满足于口头承诺。 是时候付诸行动了。 既然要行动，就得从我们 最大的污染排放者, 也就是由纳税人供养的 美国国防部开始。 当美军士兵、士兵的家人、 以及那些生活在 海外美国军事基地一带的人 都喝着毒水时， 究竟是谁在保护谁？ 全球安定不再与保护地球 或是集体健康相冲突。 人类存亡决定于此。

12:11

Similarly, agriculture in most countries depends on taxpayer-funded subsidies that are paid to farmers to secure and stabilize food supplies. These incentives are a crucial leverage point for us, because agriculture is responsible for consuming 70 percent of all the water we use every year. Fertilizer and pesticide runoff are the two biggest sources of water pollution. Let's restructure these subsidies to demand better water efficiency and less pollution.

与之相同， 大多数国家的农业都仰赖 来自纳税人的税款中 分给农民用来确保食物 供应安全稳定的津贴。 这样的激励措施对我们而言 是关键性的发力点， 因为农业消耗的水资源 占水资源消耗总量的70% 化肥与农药径流入水 是两项最大的水污染源。 让我们通过调整这类补贴 来要求更高效的用水方式 和更少的污染。

12:45

（Applause）

（掌声）

12:50

Finally: we can't expect progress if we're unwilling to confront the conflicts of interest that suppress science, that undermine innovation and that discourage transparency. It is in the public interest to measure and to share everything we can learn and discover about the risks we face in water. Reality does not exist until it's measured. It doesn't just take technology to measure it. It takes our collective will.

最后： 如果利益冲突 抑制了科学、阻碍了创新、 还降低了透明度， 而我们却不去正视这些冲突， 我们就不能指望事态会有进展。 将我们在水资源方面 研究与发现到的一切风险 进行测量并分享， 是符合大众利益的。 未经测量的事实是不成立的。 要想测量，不能光靠技术， 还得靠我们的集体意志。

13:21

Thank you.

谢谢。

13:22

（Applause）

（掌声）