I have a two-year-old daughter named Naya who is under the mistaken impression that this conference is named in honor of her father. 
我有一个两岁的女儿，名叫娜娅， 她误认为这个会议的名字 是在向他的父亲致敬。 

(Laughter) 
（笑声） 

Who am I to contradict my baby girl? 
我哪里敢反驳我的宝贝女儿呢？ 

As many of you know, there's something about becoming a parent that concentrates the mind on long-term problems like climate change. It was the birth of my daughter that inspired me to launch this climate organization, in order to counteract the excessive polarization of this issue in the United States, and to find a conservative pathway forward. Yes, folks, a Republican climate solution is possible, and you know what? It may even be better. 
很多人都有体会，为人父母之后， 才会更留心气候变化之类的长期问题。 是我女儿的出生启发了我 去建立这个气候组织， 为了对抗美国在这个问题上的 过度分化， 并找到一个保守的发展路径。 是的伙计们， 一个共和党气候策略是可能的， 更有甚者， 可能还是个更好的解决方案。 

(Laughter) 
（笑声） 

Let me try to prove that to you. 
我来给大家证明一下。 

What we really need is a killer app to climate policy. In the technology world, a killer app is an application so transformative that it creates its own market, like Uber. In the climate world, a killer app is a new solution so promising that it can break through the seemingly insurmountable barriers to progress. These include the psychological barrier. Climate advocates have long been encouraging their fellow citizens to make short-term sacrifices now for benefits that accrue to other people in other countries 30 or 40 years in the future. It just doesn't fly because it runs contrary to basic human nature. 
我们真正需要的是一个 针对气候政策的杀手级应用。 在技术领域，一个杀手级应用 是一个变革性的应用， 可以打造属于自己的市场， 比如优步。 在气候问题的领域中， 一个杀手级应用是一个 颇具前景的新策略， 可以打破看似坚不可摧的壁垒 来获得突破。 这包含了心理上的壁垒。 气候倡议者长久以来一直在 鼓励身边的市民 暂时牺牲短期的利益， 来造福若干年后 其他国家的人们。 然而效果甚微， 毕竟这有悖基本的人性。 

Next is the geopolitical barrier. Under the current rules of global trade, countries have a strong incentive to free ride off the emissions reductions of other nations, instead of strengthening their own programs. This has been the curse of every international climate negotiations, including Paris. Finally, we have the partisan barrier. Even the most committed countries — Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada — are nowhere near reducing emissions at the required scale and speed. Not even close. And the partisan climate divide is far more acute here in the United States. We are fundamentally stuck, and that is why we need a killer app of climate policy to break through each of these barriers. 
其次，还有地域政治壁垒。 在当前的国际贸易规则下， 各个国家都有着强烈的意愿去 单方面敦促其他国家 减少碳排放， 而并非强化自己国家的相关政策。 这长期以来都是 每一个国际气候谈判的 症结所在，包括巴黎协议。 最后，我们还有党派之间的冲突。 即便是最有决心的几个国家—— 德国，英国，加拿大—— 也都离合约要求的 减排规模和速度存在差距。 而且相差甚远。 而在美国，各党派在 气候问题上的分歧 更是有过之而无不及。 我们基本是在停滞不前， 因此更需要一个气候政策的杀手应用 去打破所有这些壁垒。 

I'm convinced that the road to climate progress in the United States runs through the Republican Party and the business community. So in launching the Climate Leadership Council, I started by reaching out to a who's who of Republican elder statesmen and business leaders, including James Baker and George Schultz, the two most respected Republican elder statesmen in America; Martin Feldstein and Greg Mankiw, the two most respected conservative economists in the country; and Henry Paulson and Rob Walton, two of the most successful and admired business leaders. Together, we co-authored "The Conservative Case For Carbon Dividends." This represents the first time that Republican leaders put forth a concrete market-based climate solution. 
我相信气候问题在美国要想取得进展， 需要依靠共和党 以及商业界的支持。 因此我发起了气候领导委员会， 最初就尝试着与共和党的政治大佬 和商业领袖沟通， 包括詹姆斯·贝克和乔治·舒兹， 美国最具影响力的两位政界大佬； 马丁·菲尔德斯坦和格雷格·曼昆， 美国最有威望的两位保守派经济学家； 还有亨利·鲍尔森和罗伯·沃顿， 最成功，最受人敬仰的 两位商业领袖。 我们共同撰写了 《碳红利保守方案》。 这标志着共和党领导人第一次 合作推动了坚实的 基于市场经济的气候策略。 

(Applause) 
（掌声） 

Thank you. 
谢谢大家。 

(Applause) 
（掌声） 

We presented our plan at the White House two weeks after President Trump moved in. Almost every leading editorial board in the country has since endorsed our plan, and Fortune 100 companies from a wide range of industries are now getting behind it. So by now you're probably wondering, what exactly is this plan? 
特朗普总统搬入白宫两个星期后， 我们就在那里对这一计划做了汇报。 全国几乎每一个主流编辑委员会 都为我们的计划进行了背书， 而且财富100强中各个领域的企业 也都成为了我们坚实的后盾。 那么现在你们可能很好奇， 这到底是个什么计划呢？ 

Well, our carbon dividends solution is based on four pillars. The first is a gradually rising carbon tax. Although capitalism is a wonderful system, like many operating systems, it's prone to bugs, which, in this case, are called "market failures." By far the largest is that market prices fail to take social and environmental costs into account. That means every market transaction is based on incorrect information. This fundamental bug of capitalism, more than any other single factor, is to blame for our climate predicament. 
事实上，我们的碳红利策略 是基于四个要点。 第一个就是一个逐渐增收的碳税。 虽然资本主义是个很不错的体系， 但就像很多操作系统一样， 也容易出错， 这种情况通常叫做“市场失调”。 目前出现的最大问题就是 市场价格没有将 社会和环境成本考虑在内。 这就意味着每次市场交易 都是基于错误的信息。 资本主义这个根本性的缺陷， 超越了任何其他单一因素， 要为我们的气候困境负责。 

Now in theory, this should be an easy problem to fix. Economists agree that the best solution is to put a price on the carbon content of fossil fuels, otherwise known as a carbon tax. This would discourage carbon emissions in every single economic transaction, every day of the year. However, a carbon tax by itself has proven to be unpopular and a political dead end. The answer is to return all the money raised directly to citizens, in the form of equal monthly dividends. This would transform an unpopular carbon tax into a popular and populist solution, and it would also solve the underlying psychological barrier that we discussed, by giving everyone a concrete benefit in the here and now. 
理论上，这应该是个 易如反掌的问题。 经济学家一致认为 最好的解决方案是给 化石燃料的碳含量定个价， 换句话说就是征碳税。 这样一来就会在每一天的 每一项经济交易中 抑制碳排放。 然而，事实已经证明 碳税本身并不受欢迎， 是政策上的死胡同。 而答案应该是把所有缴纳的费用 以每月固定红利的形式， 直接回馈给老百姓。 这样一来就可以把不受欢迎的 碳税转换成为 受欢迎的，大众化的解决方案， 同时也能够解决 之前谈到过的潜在的心理壁垒， 仅仅需要给每个人一个 实实在在的，当下的福利。 

And these benefits would be significant. Assuming a carbon tax rate that starts at 40 dollars per ton, a family of four would receive 2,000 dollars per year from the get-go. According to the US Treasury Department, the bottom 70 percent of Americans would receive more in dividends than they would pay in increased energy prices. That means 223 million Americans would win economically from solving climate change. And that — 
这些福利的影响将是巨大的。 假设碳税率为每吨40美元起， 一个四口之家从征税开始以后就能 每年得到2千美元。 根据美国财政部的政策， 美国底层70%的百姓，相比缴纳 日益增长的能源费用， 反而将会收到更多的红利。 也就是说2亿多的美国人民 将会因为解决气候问题 而在经济上获益。 而且—— 

(Applause) 
（掌声） 

is revolutionary, and could fundamentally alter climate politics. 
这是革命性的， 也会从根本上改变气候政治现状。 

But there's another revolutionary element here. The amount of the dividend would grow as the carbon tax rate increases. The more we protect our climate, the more our citizens benefit. This creates a positive feedback loop, which is crucial, because the only way we will reach our long-term emission-reduction goals is if the carbon tax rate goes up every year. 
不过这其中还有另外一个革命性的因素。 红利的数额将会随着 碳税率的上涨而增加。 我们对气候的保护工作做得越好， 我们的市民获利就越多。 这就产生了一个积极的反馈机制， 这很重要， 因为我们能达到长期 减排目标的唯一途径 就是碳税率会逐年增长。 

The third pillar of our program is eliminating regulations that are no longer needed once a carbon dividends plan is enacted. This is a key selling point to Republicans and business leaders. So why should we trade climate regulations for a price on carbon? Well, let me show you. Our plan would achieve nearly twice the emissions reductions of all Obama-era climate regulations combined, and nearly three times the new baseline after President Trump repeals all of those regulations. That assumes a carbon tax starting at 40 dollars per ton, which translates into roughly an extra 36 cents per gallon of gas. Our plan by itself would meet the high end of America's commitment under the Paris Climate Agreement, and as you can see, the emissions reductions would continue over time. This illustrates the power of a conservative climate solution based on free markets and limited government. We would end up with less regulation and far less pollution at the same time, while helping working-class Americans get ahead. Doesn't that sound like something we could all support? 
第三个关键点是要取消 碳红利计划实施后 就可以取消各项规章制度。 这是共和党和商业领袖们一个关键的卖点 那么为什么要用碳税 来换取代气候保护法规呢？ 我来解释一下。 我们的计划将会实现相当于奥巴马时代 所有气候协议要求的减排量的两倍， 同时也是特朗普总统废除所有规定后 设定的新的基准线的三倍。 假设以收每吨40美元的碳税为起点， 那么每加仑汽油会增加36美分的税。 我们的计划本身 将会达到巴黎气候协议中 美国所承诺的上限， 你们可以看到， 减排会随着时间持续下去。 这就证明了一个基于 自由市场和有限政府的 保守派气候策略的效果是多么显著。 我们要同时实现制度简化 和减少污染， 更要帮助美国的 劳动人民提高生活水平。 这难道不是我们都可以支持的吗？ 

(Applause) 
（掌声） 

The fourth and final pillar of our program is a new climate domino effect, based on border carbon adjustments. Now that may sound complicated, but it, too, is revolutionary, because it provides us a whole new strategy to reach a global price on carbon, which is ultimately what we need. Let me show you an example. Suppose Country A adopts a carbon dividends plan, and Country B does not. Well, to level the playing field and protect the competitiveness of its industries, Country A would tax imports from Country B based on their carbon content. Fair enough. But here's where it gets really interesting, because the money raised at the border would increase the dividends going to the citizens of Country A. Well, how long do you think it would take the public in Country B to realize that that money should be going to them, and to push for a carbon dividends plan in their own land? Add a few more countries, and we get a new climate domino effect. 
第四点，也是项目的最后一个基本点， 是一个基于边界碳调节的 新的气候多米诺效应。 这听起来有些复杂， 但它同样也是革命性的， 因为它为我们提供了一个能实现 全球碳价统一的新策略， 这也是我们的最终目标。 给大家看个例子。 假设A国采纳了一个碳红利计划， 但是B国并没有。 那么为了公平起见， 同时保护本国工业的竞争力， A国就需要根据B国商品的碳含量 对其征收进口关税。 非常公平。 不过最耐人寻味的地方在于， 征收的关税将会增加 A国公民的碳红利。 那么你们觉得B国 需要多长时间才会认识到 那些钱应该收入自己的口袋， 需要在自己的国家 也推行碳红利计划？ 在更多的国家加入之后， 我们就会制造出一个 新的气候多米诺效应。 

Once one major country or region adopts carbon dividends with border carbon adjustments, other countries are compelled to follow suit. One by one the dominoes fall. And this domino effect could start anywhere. My preference, strongly, is the United States, but it could also start in the United Kingdom, in Germany or another European country, or even in China. 
一旦一个主要国家或者地区采纳了 带有边界碳调节的碳红利计划， 其他国家就不得不跟进，效仿。 一个接一个，多米诺就这么倒了。 而且这个多米诺效应 可以始于任何地方。 我个人强烈建议，应该从美国开始， 但也可以从英国， 德国，或者其他欧洲国家开始， 甚至中国。 

Let's take China as an example. China is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but what its leaders care even more about is transitioning their economy to consumer-led economic development. Well, nothing could do more to hasten that transition than giving every Chinese citizen a monthly dividend. In fact, this is the only policy solution that would enable China to meet its environmental and economic goals at the same time. 
拿中国举个例子。 中国承诺要减少温室气体排放， 但是中国的领导人更关心的是 把国家的经济过渡到 消费品引领的经济发展模式。 很明显，没有什么能比 给每个中国公民 按月分红更能加速这种过渡了。 事实上，这是能够让中国同时 实现环境保护和经济发展双重目标的 唯一有效的政治策略。 

That's why this is the killer app of climate policy, because it would enable us to overcome each of the barriers we discussed earlier: the psychological barrier, the partisan barrier, and, as we've just seen, the geopolitical barrier. All we need is a country to lead the way. And one method of finding what you're looking for is to take out an ad. So let's read this one together. 
这也就是为什么这才是 气候政策的杀手应用， 因为它可以让我们克服 之前提到的每一项壁垒： 心理壁垒，党派壁垒， 还有我们刚刚提到过的 地缘政治壁垒。 我们需要的只是一个国家来领衔。 一个找到你想要寻找的目标的方法 就是发出一个广告。 我们一起来看看这一条。 

Wanted: country to pioneer carbon dividends plan. Cost to country: zero. Starting date: as soon as possible. Advantages: most effective climate solution, popular and populist, pro-growth and pro-business, shrinks government and helps the working class. Additional compensation: gratitude of current and future generations, including my daughter. 
诚需：碳红利计划的国家先驱。 国家成本：零。 起始日期：即日可上岗。 优势：最有效的气候策略， 认可度高，平民化， 促进增长，促进商业化， 缩减政府机构，帮助劳动阶层。 额外补助：当代和子孙后代的无限感恩， 还包括我的女儿。 

Thank you. 
谢谢大家。 

(Applause) 
（掌声） 克里斯·安德森： 我只问一个问题，泰德。 我其实不太确定 是不是在TED的讲台上见过 一个保守党人士获得如此满堂彩。 这太棒了。 逻辑上听上去真的很有说服力， 不过一些政治领域的人 觉得很难想象国会 要如何通过这项计划。 你对这背后的推动力怎么看？ 泰德·哈尔斯特德： 我很理解很多人对 特朗普总统在美国的 种种作为持非常悲观的态度。 我觉得还好，原因如下。 这届白宫团队的行动， 对气候问题的提早行动， 只是一个复杂的气候棋局的第一步。 目前为止这只是一个废除性的策略； 而真正面临压力的将会是 一个替代性的项目， 也就是我们参与的部分。 有三个原因，我来简单陈述一下。 第一，商业界在 气候变化问题上的观点 与白宫从本质上是有些不谋而合的。 事实上，我们的项目得到了 一部分财富100强公司的支持。 两个月之内，我们就会宣布 一些真正振奋人心的支持者的名字。 第二，毫无疑问，美国政治当中 比气候变化分歧更大的是 共和党内的普通民众 和共和党政治领导群体的矛盾。 第三点，类似于棋局中的博弈， 我们所面临的巨大决策是： 相关行政机构需要留在巴黎吗？ 我们来分析一下这两种情况。 如果仍然驻守巴黎， 就像很多内部人士极力推行的， 这就引出了一个问题： 有什么（现成的）计划吗？ 当然我们已经有计划了。 但如果不在巴黎， 国际社会就会源源不断的进行施压。 我们的国务卿将会质问 其他国家对北约的贡献， 他们就会说，“别提这个， 交出你们对巴黎协议的承诺。 你们先兑现诺言， 我们自然会说到做到。” 所以，国际社会，商业领域， 甚至包括共和党民众， 通通都会呼吁一个来自 共和党的替代性计划。 同时希望我们的计划能够不负众望。 克里斯：非常感谢你，泰德。 泰德：谢谢，克里斯。 （掌声）