绿色能源转型的盲点

世界需要清洁能源，但脱碳需要大量增加锂、石墨和钴等矿物的开采和提取。环境和平缔造专家 Olivia Lazard 阐明了对这些珍贵矿产资源的争夺——以及控制其供应链的国家（包括中国和俄罗斯）如何发现自己处于新的全球舞台的中心。了解为什么 Lazard 认为地球安全取决于我们降低资源竞争并避免导致气候危机的同样错误的能力

Hi. It's about as intimidating as I thought it would be.

你好。 这和我想象的一样令人生畏。

And yet you’d think or I’d think that I'd be accustomed to more stressful situations. You see, I work in international security and in conflict resolution. And today, I'm here to talk about some of our blind spots related to decarbonization.

然而你会认为或者我会认为 我会习惯于压力更大的情况。 你看，我在国际安全和解决冲突方面工作。 而今天，我在这里谈谈我们与脱碳有关的一些盲点。

Now, what does one have to do with the other, you may ask.Good question. We often hear that a climate-safe future is a necessary condition for peace. That's true. We also often hear that renewables could be the energy of peace. Less true. To understand, I need to tell you about the materials that we need in order to decarbonize. They're pretty. And they can be deadly.Looking into their story tells us that confronting conflict and building new forms of international peace are going to be critical foundations to build a climate-safe future.

现在，你可能会问，一个与另一个有什么关系。 好问题。 我们经常听到气候安全的未来是和平的必要条件。 确实如此。 我们还经常听到可再生能源可能是和平的能源。 不太真实。 为了理解，我需要告诉你 脱碳所需的材料。 他们很漂亮。 它们可能是致命的。 研究他们的故事告诉我们，面对冲突 和建立新形式的国际和平 将成为建立气候安全未来的关键基础。

So let me tell you about them, starting with where we stand now.When we talk about a decarbonized future, we generally have in mind the possibility of decoupling economic growth from greenhouse gas emissions. That’s what we call “green growth.”What we tend to think about less often is that to get there we need to recouple economic growth with intensive mineral extraction. To harness renewables or renewable energy like the sun and the wind, we obviously need to build technologies such as solar panels, windmills, batteries, right? And to build those, we need to mine huge quantities of non-renewable materials such as these. Knowing that it takes mines as big as these to produce that much amount of usable material. Our ticket to green growth, in other words, is digging deep in the environment.

所以让我告诉你他们， 从我们现在的立场开始。 当我们谈论脱碳未来时， 我们通常会想到将经济增长 与温室气体排放脱钩的可能性。这就是我们所说的“绿色增长”。 我们倾向于较少考虑的是，要实现这一目标， 我们需要将经济增长与密集的矿产开采重新结合起来。为了利用太阳能和风能等可再生能源或可再生能源， 我们显然需要建造太阳能电池板、 风车、电池等技术，对吗？ 为了建造这些，我们需要开采大量的不可再生材料 ，例如这些。 知道它需要像这些一样大的地雷 生产那么多可用的材料。 换句话说，我们的绿色增长门票 是深入环境。

Now we know that mining can have grave impacts for local ecosystems and populations. I’ve seen it myself, and it really isn’t pretty. But what I want to talk about today is about how much and where we’re going to have to dig, and what that means for planetary security and for geopolitics.

现在我们知道采矿会对 当地生态系统和人口产生严重影响。 我自己也看过，真的不好看。 但我今天想谈的 是我们将要挖掘多少和在哪里挖掘， 以及这对行星安全和地缘政治意味着什么。

I'll start from there. History tells us that when the dominant source of energy changes, power relations change as well.Countries that can transform energy to their own advantage, can gain the upper hand economically and politically, and then can put themselves at the center of the global order. Think of the United Kingdom and coal, for instance, or how oil determined the ascendance of the US to a global superpower. What that tells us is that the access to and processing of energy literally materializes into the ability to shape geopolitical power dynamics.And today, we're facing the challenge of implementing the biggest energy transition in the history of humankind under a ticking climate clock. The race is on for a new generation of power. At the heart of which you have all of the critical materialsthat we need to decarbonize on the one hand and digitalize on the other.

我将从那里开始。 历史告诉我们 ，当能源的主要来源发生变化时，权力关系也会发生变化。 能够将能源转化为自身优势的国家， 能够在经济和政治上占据上风， 进而能够将自己置于全球秩序的中心。例如，想想英国和煤炭， 或者石油如何决定了美国成为全球超级大国。 这告诉我们的是， 能源的获取和处理 实际上转化为塑造地缘政治权力动态的能力。 而今天， 我们正面临着实施 人类历史上最大的能源转型的挑战 在滴答作响的气候时钟下。 争夺新一代权力的竞赛正在进行中。 在其中的核心，您拥有 我们一方面需要脱碳 和另一方面数字化所需的所有关键材料。

So what's happening with them? On the demand side we're at the beginning of an exponential demand curve. If you take lithium as a proxy, a key component for [batteries], global production already increased by just short of 300 percent between 2010 and 2020. I'm going to pause here for a sec. This is really good news. It means that decarbonization is in motion. The not so good news is that our "clean" future is going to be more materially intensive than before. If you take a simple measure for it, the International Energy Agency tells us that with the current level of innovation, an electric car requires six times more mineral inputs than a conventional car. And this is only the start. The World Bank tells us that with the current projections, global production for minerals such as graphite and cobalt will increase by 500 percent by 2050, only to meet the demand for clean energy technologies.

那么他们怎么了？ 在需求方面，我们处于指数需求曲线的起点。 如果你把锂作为[电池]的关键组成部分，那么 在 2010 年至 2020 年间，全球产量已经增长了近 300% 。 我将在此稍作停顿。这真是个好消息。这意味着脱碳正在进行中。不太好的消息是，我们的“清洁”未来将比以前更加密集。如果你采取一个简单的衡量标准，国际能源署告诉我们，以目前的创新水平，电动汽车需要的矿物投入是传统汽车的六倍。 而这仅仅是开始。 世界银行告诉我们，按照目前的预测，到 2050 年， 全球石墨和钴等矿物的产量 将增加 500%，以满足对清洁能源技术的需求。

Now let's look on the supply side. That's where a lot of really interesting things are happening. Who currently exploits and processes minerals and where deposits to meet future demand are located tell us exactly how the transition is going to change geopolitics. So if you look at a material such as lithium, countries like Chile and Australia tend to dominate extraction while China dominates processing. For cobalt, the Democratic Republic of Congo dominates extraction while China dominates processing.For nickel, countries like Indonesia and the Philippines tend to dominate extraction, while China, you guessed it, thank you,dominates processing. And for rare earths, China dominates extraction while China dominates processing.

现在让我们看看供应方面。 这就是许多真正有趣的事情发生的地方。 目前谁在开采和加工矿产 ，以及满足未来需求的矿床位于何处，这些都 告诉我们转型将如何改变地缘政治。 因此，如果你看一下锂等材料， 智利和澳大利亚等国家往往主导开采 ，而中国主导加工。 对于钴，刚果民主共和国主导开采 ，而中国主导加工。 对于镍， 印度尼西亚和菲律宾等国家 往往主导开采， 而中国，你猜对了，谢谢， 主导加工。 而对于稀土， 中国主导着开采，而中国主导着加工。

I've just said China a lot, didn't I? Well, that's because China skillfully leveraged its geo-economic rise to power over the last two decades on the back of integrating supply chains for rare earths from extraction to processing to export. We tend to point fingers at China today for not going fast enough on its own domestic energy transition, but the truth is that China understood already long ago that it would play a central role in other countries' transitions. And it is. The European Union, for instance, is 98 percent dependent on China for rare earths.Needless to say, this puts China in a prime position to redesign the global balance of power.

我刚刚说了很多中国，不是吗？ 嗯，这是因为中国巧妙地利用 了过去 20 年的地缘经济崛起，在整合稀土供应链（ 从开采到加工再到出口）的支持下。 今天，我们倾向于指责中国 在国内能源转型方面的步伐不够快， 但事实是，中国早就明白 它将在其他国家的转型中发挥核心作用。 它是。 例如，欧盟 98% 的稀土依赖中国。 不用说， 这使中国处于重新设计全球力量平衡的首要位置。

Now, you may argue that this is a good thing because the global balance of power needs a rehaul anyway. And you know what? I can totally roll with that. But -- and this applies to China, the United States, and any other big player -- we need to make sure that the redesigning process doesn't compromise on human rights or open societies. And that it doesn't lead to the weaponization of supply chains at a time of international instability, and more importantly, at a time of complete climate breakdown. Unfortunately, we're already seeing signs of this happening. China is currently trying to gain access to more mineral resources through its Belt and Road Initiative. The United States and Europe are both thinking of reshoring critical miningand processing and orienting some of their international partnerships to facilitate access to more mineral resources.Japan is exploring some of its oceanic marine reserves to build strategic reserves. I'm also speaking in the shadow of a war on the European continent. Now at first sight, Russia's invasion of Ukraine has nothing to do with what I've been talking about. But Ukraine happens to be mineral rich. It also happens to be one of only two countries that had struck a partnership with the European Union to diversify and develop supply chains for critical raw materials. That partnership was specifically designed to help the EU decarbonize and in the process to better integrate with Ukraine from a political and economic perspective. Eight months after the partnership was struck, the invasion took place. Now, mineral resources may not explain everything about the war. But they certainly can't be ignored in analyzing the events. Because when it comes to the race for critical raw materials, what's actually happening is that we're headed right back into a new scramble for resources, at the heart of which you find all of the big players eyeing countries with vast mineral deposits.

现在，你可能会争辩说这是一件好事 ，因为无论如何全球力量平衡都需要重新调整。 你知道吗？ 我完全可以接受。 但是——这适用于中国、美国 和任何其他大国—— 我们需要确保重新设计的过程不会损害人权或开放社会。 在国际不稳定的时候，更重要的是，在气候完全崩溃的时候，它不会导致供应链的武器化。 不幸的是，我们已经看到了这种情况发生的迹象。中国目前正试图通过“一带一路”倡议获得更多矿产资源。 美国和欧洲 都在考虑将关键的采矿 和加工业务重新转移， 并调整它们的一些国际合作伙伴关系 ，以促进获得更多矿产资源。 日本正在探索其部分海洋海洋保护区 ，以建立战略储备。 我也是在欧洲大陆战争的阴影下发言。 现在乍看之下，俄罗斯入侵乌克兰与我所说的毫无关系。 但乌克兰恰好矿产丰富。它也恰好是仅有的两个 与欧盟建立伙伴关系 以实现关键原材料供应链多样化和发展的国家之一。 该伙伴关系旨在帮助欧盟脱碳，并在此过程中 从政治和经济角度更好地与乌克兰融合。 合作关系终止八个月后，入侵发生了。现在，矿产资源可能无法解释战争的一切。但在分析事件时，它们当然不能被忽视。因为当谈到关键原材料的竞争时，实际发生的事情是，我们正重新进入新的资源争夺战，在这个争夺战的核心，你会发现所有大型企业都在关注拥有大量矿藏的国家。

And yet it's so obvious many of these countries that are located,for the most part, in Africa, in Latin America, in Central Asia and in the Indo-Pacific. Economists will tell you that this is a great thing,because these countries, or at least a lot of them, need economic resources and many, to accelerate their development pathway and climate adaptation. But. Many of these countries also have very real overlapping risk profiles. The International Institute for Sustainable Development first produced this map back in 2018. Can you see the green dots on the map? They represent all of the different materials that we need in order to decarbonize, their geographic location and their deposit size. As it so happens, a lot of the deposits are located in countries that rank fairly high on corruption indices. They are represented essentially by the shades of brown and red on the map. And as it so happens, a lot of the materials are also located in countries that are fragile, such as Sri Lanka, or downright conflict affected, like Myanmar and the Central African Republic.

然而，很明显，这些国家中有许多 大部分位于非洲、 拉丁美洲、中亚和印太地区。 经济学家会告诉你，这是一件了不起的事情， 因为这些国家，或者至少其中很多国家， 需要经济资源和许多国家， 以加快他们的发展道路和气候适应。 但。 其中许多国家也有非常真实的重叠风险状况。 国际可持续发展研究所 于 2018 年首次制作了这张地图。 你能看到地图上的绿点吗？ 它们代表了 我们脱碳所需的所有不同材料， 他们的地理位置和存款规模。 碰巧的是，许多存款都位于 腐败指数排名相当高的国家。 它们基本上由地图上的棕色和红色阴影表示。 碰巧 的是，许多材料也位于脆弱的国家， 例如斯里兰卡， 或受到彻底冲突影响的国家，例如缅甸 和中非共和国。

That's not all. The Notre Dame Institute tells us, with this map, in which you see, again, some red and orange, that countries that are climate vulnerable are also the ones that are resource endowed. And one final thing. You know those big ecosystems that we need to protect and regenerate in order to stabilize the global climate regime? To reboot the hydrological cycle and to protect biodiversity? They're also represented in orange and red on this map. Many of these big ecosystems are located in the same fragile countries that I was mentioning before. They also happen to sit on vast mineral deposits. Changing or eliminating these ecosystems through mining, through deforestation or anything else would undermine planetary security. Not just international security. Planetary security.

那不是全部。 圣母院研究所通过这张地图告诉我们， 您再次看到一些红色和橙色的地图， 气候脆弱 的国家也是资源丰富的国家。 最后一件事。 您知道我们需要保护和再生 以稳定全球气候制度的那些大生态系统吗？ 重启水文循环 并保护生物多样性？ 它们在这张地图上也以橙色和红色表示。 这些大型生态系统中的许多都位于 我之前提到的同样脆弱的国家。 它们也恰好坐落在巨大的矿藏上。 改变或消除这些生态系统 通过采矿、砍伐森林或其他任何 方式都会破坏地球的安全。 不仅仅是国际安全。 行星安全。

It's essentially like a perfect storm in the making. Corruption,institutional and socioeconomic fragility, climate disruptions and environmental plundering, all acting as a backdrop to a competition to gain access to the minerals that we need in order to decarbonize. All of these factors will be magnified if we don't rein in the scramble for resources. All of them will reinforce one another.

它本质上就像一场完美的风暴。 腐败、 制度和社会经济的脆弱性、气候破坏和环境掠夺， 所有这些都是 竞争获取 脱碳所需矿物的背景。 如果我们不控制对资源的争夺，所有这些因素都会被放大。 他们都会互相加强。

And I want to make something very clear here. The countries at the heart of the resource scrambling may suffer the most direct consequences in terms of their ability to develop, to adapt to climate change and to avoid violence. But their fate is not isolated. Their problems are not geographically distant. Our big blind spot here is that we're headed towards a decarbonization trajectory that may end up undermining ecological integrity and heighten the risks of conflict and insecurity whose consequences would reverberate worldwide.

我想在这里说得很清楚。 处于资源争夺中心的国家可能 在其发展能力、适应气候变化和避免暴力方面遭受最直接的后果。 但他们的命运并不是孤立的。他们的问题在地理上并不遥远。我们在这里的最大盲点是，我们正走向脱碳轨迹，最终可能会破坏生态完整性，并增加冲突和不安全的风险，其后果将在全球范围内引起反响。

I know that this is not a particularly encouraging picture. And that it comes on top of layers of pictures that are not particularly encouraging. Our modern economies have advanced and grown for two centuries through the gigantic blind spot of fossil fuel exploitation and its unintended consequences. The big lesson here is that we can't afford to just shift to a different set of energies, technologies and materials without paying attention to the unintended consequences. The stakes are too high. They involve our future. That we know. But they also involve our humanity. And they involve our nature, by which I mean the nature that we choose for ourselves.

我知道这不是一个特别令人鼓舞的画面。 而且它出现在并不是特别令人鼓舞的图片层之上。 通过化石燃料开采的巨大盲点及其意想不到的后果，我们的现代经济已经发展和发展了两个世纪。这里的重要教训是，我们不能只转移到一组不同的能源、技术和材料而不注意意外后果。赌注太高了。它们涉及我们的未来。我们知道。但它们也涉及我们的人性。它们涉及我们的本性，我指的是我们为自己选择的本性。

Decarbonization is the way forward. There’s not one single doubt allowedd about this. But the way forward also demands of usthat we start imagining our future beyond decarbonization already. Remember what I said at the beginning? A climate-safe future is a necessary condition for peace. But we won't achieve a climate-safe future without peace. And to build peace, we need to shake things up in international politics and in the way that we do business and economics. So where do we start? I'd like to offer the scaffolding of a plan in four different baskets.

脱碳是前进的方向。 这一点不容置疑。 但前进的道路也要求 我们开始想象我们已经超越脱碳的未来。 还记得我一开始说的话吗？ 气候安全的未来是和平的必要条件。 但是，如果没有和平，我们将无法实现气候安全的未来。 为了建立和平， 我们需要改变国际政治以及我们开展商业和经济的方式。 那么我们从哪里开始呢？ 我想在四个不同的篮子中提供一个计划的脚手架。

First, science. Science can tell us exactly where it is safe to mine and where it isn't, from an ecological perspective. Where it is not safe to mine, we need to act as though these minerals did not exist and establish protected areas under which no mining licensing can take place. Where mining does take place, we can integrate socioeconomic and ecological regeneration within business models.

第一，科学。 从生态学的角度，科学可以准确地告诉我们哪里可以安全开采，哪里不安全。 在开采不安全的地方，我们需要假装这些矿物不存在，并建立保护区，在该保护区内不得获得采矿许可。在确实进行采矿的地方，我们可以将社会经济和生态再生整合到商业模式中。

Second, a global public good regime. If decarbonization is a matter of human survival, then the materials that we need in order to decarbonize should be managed collectively under a global public good regime. The alternative is conflict and planetary breakdown. So while we figure out exactly how to design this regime, the countries at the heart of the scramble for resources should receive adequate support, competent and coherent support to face off the joint challenges of geopolitical competition and climate disruptions on the other hand. In other words, investing into conflict resolution, into the fight against corruption and into context-specific resilience, should be top priorities of our global energy transition.

第二，全球公益制度。 如果脱碳事关人类生存， 那么脱碳所需的材料 应在全球公共产品制度下进行集体管理。 另一种选择是冲突和行星崩溃。 因此，当我们确切地弄清楚如何设计这一制度时， 处于资源争夺中心的国家 应该得到足够的支持、 有能力和一致的支持 ，以应对地缘政治竞争 和气候破坏的共同挑战。 换言之，投资于解决冲突、 打击腐败 和针对具体情况的复原力， 应该是我们全球能源转型的重中之重。

Third, changing the way that we do business and economics. We can't just switch from one energy system to another. I've made that pretty clear, right? What we need instead is to reduce our need for energy and for materials. And that starts with massive public and private investments into circular economic modelsthat favor recyclability and material substitution. Now, here's the thing. We know that this is a necessary step, but not a sufficient one. So what we also need to do is to develop ecological assessments for supply chains that account for greenhouse gas emissions, but also for water, soil, biodiversity, material and energy footprint all at once. Only on this all-encompassing basiswill we understand how supply and distribution chains need to change and therefore how globalization needs to transform.

第三， 改变我们做生意和经济的方式。 我们不能只是从一种能源系统切换到另一种能源系统。 我已经说得很清楚了，对吧？ 相反，我们需要 的是减少对能源和材料的需求。 首先是对有利于可回收性和材料替代的循环经济模型进行大量公共和私人投资。 现在，事情就是这样。我们知道这是一个必要的步骤，但还不够。因此，我们还需要做的是对供应链进行生态评估，这些评估包括温室气体排放，以及水、土壤、生物多样性、材料 和能源足迹。 只有在这个包罗万象的基础上 ，我们才能理解供应链和分销链需要如何改变 ，以及全球化需要如何转型。

Fourth, innovation. All of this can only happen if we start shifting our thinking about innovation. Innovation in our times is about bringing back economic footprint within planetary boundaries.Anything else, even the coolest of new products, if it isn't aligned with that goal, it's not innovation, it's business as usual. In our little corner of the world, my team and I at Carnegie Europe have been working really hard to identify what regenerative foreign policy looks like and what it aims for. There are two things that we know by now. One is obvious, we need to tackle fundamental issues around economic redistribution on a global scale. The other thing is that we need a geopolitical de-escalation around decarbonisation and regeneration. We've translated that into a concept we've called ecological diplomacy. And we're pushing really hard for the European Union to adopt this framework within their foreign policy. Because if there is one thing that we've understood, it's that ecological integrity is the foundation for all types of security. Which makes it the one common denominatorthat we can work on rebuilding collectively. And we can manage.Truly, I believe that we can. As long as we shed light on our transition blind spots and take them as our guiding companionsto identify what truly systemic, truly peaceful and truly safe solution pathways look like for the age of climate-disrupted futures.

是 创新。 只有当我们开始转变对创新的思考时，所有这一切才能发生。 我们时代的创新是要在地球边界内恢复经济足迹。其他任何事情，即使是最酷的新产品，如果不符合这个目标，那就不是创新，而是一切照旧。在我们这个世界的小角落，我和我在卡内基欧洲的团队一直在努力确定再生外交政策的样子和目标。我们现在知道两件事。显而易见，我们需要在全球范围内解决围绕经济再分配的基本问题。 另一件事是，我们需要围绕脱碳和再生 的地缘政治降级。我们已经将其转化为我们称之为生态外交的概念。 我们正在努力推动欧盟 在其外交政策中采用这一框架。 因为如果我们已经理解了一件事， 那就是生态完整性是 所有类型安全的基础。 这使它成为我们可以共同重建的一个共同点。 我们可以管理。真的，我相信我们可以。只要我们阐明我们的过渡盲点，并将它们作为我们的指导伙伴，以确定什么是真正的系统性， 真正和平 和真正安全的解决方案路径看起来像 受气候破坏的未来时代。

Thank you so much.

太感谢了。