评论
打印
So when we went through the numbers, and just added that up
当我们查看这些数据的时候，把它们加起来，
how much nuclear do we see China and India bringing online over the next 15 years,
未来15年内，中国和印度会建多少核电站呢？
how much do we see at risk of being taken offline -- this was the most startling finding.
又有多少面临被报废的风险呢？答案令人震惊。
What we found is that the world is actually at risk of losing four times more clean energy than we lost over the last 10 years.
我们发现世界正面临着失去四倍于过去十年清洁能源丧失量的危机。
In other words: we're not in a clean energy revolution; we're in a clean energy crisis.
换句话说，我们并不在进行清洁能源革命，我们正处在清洁能源危机中，
So it's understandable that engineers would look for a technical fix to the fears that people have of nuclear.
所以考虑到人们对核能的恐惧，工程师们正在寻找技术修复是完全可以理解的。
But when you consider that these are big challenges to do, that they're going to take a long time to solve,
但当考虑到这些巨大的挑战，解决是需要花费很长时间的。
there's this other issue, which is: Are those technical fixes really going to solve people's fears?
另一个问题是：这些技术修复真的能够解决人们对核能的恐惧吗？
Let's take safety. You know, despite what people think, it's hard to figure out how to make nuclear power much safer.
拿安全问题来说吧。尽管人们是这么想的，但是真正让核能听起来安全是很困难的。
I mean, every medical journal that looks at it -- this is the most recent study from the British journal, "Lancet,"
我的意思是，看看那些有关核能的医药杂志，这是英国《柳叶刀》杂志的最新研究，
one of the most respected journals in the world -- nuclear is the safest way to make reliable power.
《柳叶刀》是世界上最受认可的杂志之一，核能是最安全的发电方式。
Everybody's scared of the accidents.
每个人都害怕事故。
So you go look at the accident data -- Fukushima, Chernobyl-- the World Health Organization finds the same thing:
所以你去查看事故数据--福岛和切尔诺贝利--世界卫生组织在两次事故中总结出了同样的结论：
the vast majority of harm is caused by people panicking, and they're panicking because they're afraid.
大部分的伤害是由人民的恐慌造成的，然而他们的恐慌来源于他们的恐惧。
In other words, the harm that's caused isn't actually caused by the machines or the radiation. It's caused by our fears.
换句话说，伤害并不是由机器或是辐射造成的，而是由我们的恐惧造成的。
