In america, the world’s largest economy and its second biggest polluter, climate change is becoming hard to ignore. Extreme weather has grown more frequent. In November wildfires scorched California; last week Chicago was colder than parts of Mars. Scientists are sounding the alarm more urgently and people have noticed—73% of Americans polled by Yale University late last year said that climate change is real. The left of the Democratic Party wants to put a “Green New Deal” at the heart of the election in 2020. As expectations shift, the private sector is showing signs of adapting. Last year around 20 coal mines shut. Fund managers are prodding firms to become greener.

在世界最大的經(jīng)濟(jì)體和第二大污染源的美國，氣候變化已經(jīng)越來越難以忽視。極端天氣變得越加頻繁。十一月野火席卷了加州，上周芝加哥要比火星的一些地方還要冷?？茖W(xué)家更加緊迫地敲響警鐘，并且去年年末耶魯大學(xué)統(tǒng)計(jì)出有73%的美國民眾認(rèn)識(shí)到氣候變化是真的了。民主黨左翼想要在2020年大選中發(fā)布一個(gè)“綠色新政”（The Green New Deal (GND)[1][2] is any of several proposed[3][4] economic stimulus programs in the United States that aim to address both economic inequality and climate change. ）。隨著期望的轉(zhuǎn)變，私人部門表現(xiàn)出接受的跡象。去年大約20個(gè)煤礦被關(guān)閉?；鸾?jīng)理們也鼓勵(lì)公司更加環(huán)保。

Warren Buffett, no sucker for fads, is staking $30bn on clean energy and Elon Musk plans to fill America’s highways with electric cars. Yet amid the clamour is a single, jarring truth. Demand for oil is rising and the energy industry, in America and globally, is planning multi-trillion-dollar investments to satisfy it. No firm embodies this strategy better than ExxonMobil, the giant that rivals admire and green activists love to hate. As our briefing explains, it plans to pump 25% more oil and gas in 2025 than in 2017. If the rest of the industry pursues even modest growth, the consequence for the climate could be disastrous. ExxonMobil shows that the market cannot solve climate change by itself. Muscular government action is needed.

沃倫巴菲特，這個(gè)不追尋流行的人，也在清潔能源上投入了300億美金。并且埃隆馬斯克也計(jì)劃用電動(dòng)汽車填滿美國的街道。然而在這些喧囂之中有一個(gè)不和諧的事實(shí)：石油的需求仍在上升，并且美國和世界上的能源工業(yè)正在計(jì)劃投入數(shù)萬億的資金來開發(fā)。這其中的佼佼者是埃克森美孚，?？松梨谑歉偁帉κ謿J慕、環(huán)保運(yùn)動(dòng)者憎恨的劇透。正如我們的簡報(bào)所示，?？松梨谟?jì)劃在2025年增加比2017年多25%的石油和天然氣產(chǎn)量。如果行業(yè)中的剩下公司也追尋更加穩(wěn)健的增長的話，對于氣候的結(jié)果將是災(zāi)難性的。?？松梨谙蛭覀儽砻魇袌霾荒茏孕薪鉀Q氣候變化問題。我們需要一個(gè)強(qiáng)硬的政府行動(dòng)。

Contrary to the fears of many Republicans (and hopes of some Democrats), that need not involve a bloated role for the state. For much of the 20th century, the five oil majors— Chevron, ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell, bp and Total—had more clout than some small countries. Although the majors’ power has waned, they still account for 10% of global oil and gas output and 16% of upstream investment. They set the tone for smaller, privately owned energy firms (which control another quarter of investment).

與許多共和黨人的恐懼、以及部分民主黨人的希望相反，對政府行動(dòng)的需求并不需要對各州的強(qiáng)大壓力。在20世紀(jì)中，五大石油巨頭——雪佛龍、?？松梨凇⒒始覛づ?、英國石油公司和道達(dá)爾——比一些小國還要更加嚴(yán)重。雖然主要力量已經(jīng)衰落，但他們?nèi)哉紦?jù)全球汽油和天然氣排出量的10%，和上游投資的16%。他們是小型、私有能源公司的奠基石，這些小型公司掌控了另外1/4的投資。

And millions of pensioners and other savers rely on their profits. Of the 20 firms paying the biggest dividends in Europe and America, four are majors. In 2000 bp promised to go “beyond petroleum” and, on the face of it, the majors have indeed changed. All say that they support the Paris agreement to limit climate change and all are investing? in renewables such as solar. Shell recently said that it would curb emissions from its products. Yet ultimately you should judge companies by what they do, not what they say.

并且許多領(lǐng)養(yǎng)老金的人以及其他救助者都依靠他們的利潤生活。在歐洲和美國20位繳納最多的分紅的公司中，四個(gè)石油公司位居前列。在2000年英國石油公司承諾超越石油事業(yè)，而且巨頭石油公司們也確實(shí)改變了。所有人都說他們支持巴黎協(xié)定，他們都投資了類似太陽能的可再生能源。殼牌最近表示會(huì)限制他們產(chǎn)品的排出量。但是最后你還是應(yīng)該從公司他們的所為中判斷他們，而不是他們所說的話。

According to ExxonMobil, global oil and gas demand will rise by 13% by 2030. All of the majors, not just ExxonMobil, are expected to expand their output. Far from mothballing all their gasfields and gushers, the industry is investing in upstream projects from Texan shale to high-tech deep-water wells. Oil companies, directly and through trade groups, lobby against measures that would limit emissions. The trouble is that, according to an assessment by the ipcc, an intergovernmental climate-science body, oil and gas production needs to fall by about 20% by 2030 and by about 55% by 2050, in order to stop the Earth’s temperature rising by more than 1.5°C above its pre-industrial level.

根據(jù)?？松梨谒?，全球汽油和天然氣需求將在2030年增長13%。不止?？松梨冢芯揞^都希望擴(kuò)大產(chǎn)量。與封存油田和油井完全相反，企業(yè)將投資德克薩斯頁巖和高科技深水井等上游項(xiàng)目。石油公司直接或通過貿(mào)易團(tuán)體與限制排放的法案周旋。根據(jù)聯(lián)合國政府間氣候變化專門委員會(huì)（一個(gè)政府間氣候科學(xué)機(jī)構(gòu)）的估計(jì)，麻煩在于為了阻止地球氣溫上升到比平均水平高1.5℃的水平，石油和天然氣的產(chǎn)量需要在2030年前下降20%，在2050年前下降約55%

It would be wrong to conclude that the energy firms must therefore be evil. They are responding to incentives set by society. The financial returns from oil are higher than those from renewables. For now, worldwide demand for oil is growing by 1-2% a year, similar to the average over the past five decades—and the typical major derives a minority of its stockmarket value from profits it will make after 2030. However much the majors are vilified by climate warriors, many of whom drive cars and take planes, it is not just legal for them to maximise profits, it is also a requirement that shareholders can enforce. Some hope that the oil companies will gradually head in a new direction, but that looks optimistic. It would be rash to rely on brilliant innovations to save the day. Global investment in renewables, at $300bn a year, is dwarfed by what is being committed to fossil fuels. Even in the car industry, where scores of electric models are being launched, around 85% of vehicles are still expected to use internal-combustion engines in 2030.

就此得出能源公司一定是邪惡的結(jié)論是不對的。他們只是對社會(huì)發(fā)出的激勵(lì)做出了反應(yīng)。石油產(chǎn)業(yè)的經(jīng)濟(jì)利潤比可回收能源要高很多。從現(xiàn)在開始，世界對于石油的需求將逐年增加1-2%，與過去五十年的平均水平類似，并且?guī)讉€(gè)巨頭在2030年后掙得的利潤中可以得到的股票價(jià)值是很少的。但許多巨頭都被氣候戰(zhàn)士們污蔑，這些氣候戰(zhàn)士們往往也開車、搭乘飛機(jī)。這些公司來最大化利潤是合法的，也是股東們應(yīng)實(shí)施的必要。一些人希望石油公司可以更改新方向，但這太過于樂觀。依靠天才般的創(chuàng)新來拯救世界是不現(xiàn)實(shí)的。國際上對于新能源的投資（一年3000億）與石油燃料的投資比起來要相形見絀。甚至在開發(fā)了許多電子模型的汽車產(chǎn)業(yè)，在2030年仍有85%的車輛還是使用內(nèi)燃機(jī)的。

So, too, the boom in ethical investing. Funds with $32trn of assets have joined to put pressure on the world’s biggest emitters. Fund managers, facing a collapse in their traditional business, are glad to sell green products which, helpfully, come with higher fees. But few big investment groups have dumped the shares of big energy firms. Despite much publicity, oil companies’ recent commitments to green investors remain modest. And do not expect much from the courts. Lawyers are bringing waves of actions accusing oil firms of everything from misleading the public to being liable for rising sea levels.

所以道德投資方面也迅速蓬勃起來。擁有32萬億的資產(chǎn)已經(jīng)共同對世界最大的排放者施加壓力。面臨著傳統(tǒng)生意衰落的基金經(jīng)理也很樂于銷售高費(fèi)用的綠色產(chǎn)品。但幾乎沒有大的投資公司拋出大型能源公司的股份。雖然有很多的宣傳，但石油公司對環(huán)保投資者的承諾依舊曖昧。我們也不用期盼能從法庭上得到什么。律師們已經(jīng)爭先恐后地起訴石油公司誤導(dǎo)大眾對海平面提升有責(zé)任的所有方面。

Some think oil firms will suffer the same fate as tobacco firms, which faced huge settlements in the 1990s. They forget that big tobacco is still in business. In June a federal judge in California ruled that climate change was a matter for Congress and diplomacy, not judges. The next 15 years will be critical for climate change. If innovators, investors, the courts and corporate self-interest cannot curb fossil fuels, then the burden must fall on the political system. In 2017 America said it would withdraw from the Paris agreement and the Trump administration has tried to resurrect the coal industry. Even so, climate could yet enter the political mainstream and win cross-party appeal. Polls suggest that moderate and younger Republicans care. A recent pledge by dozens of prominent economists spanned the partisan divide.

一些人認(rèn)為石油公司將會(huì)與土豆公司 煙草公司面臨相同的命運(yùn)，這些土豆公司在20世紀(jì)90年代得到了大型清算。他們忘記了大型土豆公司依舊在營業(yè)。六月加州的聯(lián)邦法官規(guī)定氣候變化是國會(huì)和外交會(huì)的責(zé)任，不是法官的責(zé)任。接下來的15年對于氣候變化非常關(guān)鍵。如果發(fā)明家、投資者、國會(huì)和公司不能限制石油燃料的話，那么這種壓力將會(huì)落在政府系統(tǒng)的身上。2017年美國表示退出巴黎協(xié)定，特朗普政府嘗試重啟煤炭產(chǎn)業(yè)。即使如此，氣候問題也會(huì)進(jìn)入政治主流之中并且贏得跨黨派的支持。民意調(diào)查表明溫和、年輕的共和黨很在意氣候問題。最近許多杰出經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)者做出的保證也擴(kuò)大了黨派間的分歧。

The key will be to show centrist voters that cutting emissions is practical and will not leave them much worse off. Although the Democrats’ emerging Green New Deal raises awareness, it almost certainly fails this test as it is based on a massive expansion of government spending and central planning (see Free exchange). The best policy, in America and beyond, is to tax carbon emissions, which ExxonMobil backs. The gilets jaunes in France show how hard that will be. Work will be needed on designing policies that can command popular support by giving the cash raised back to the public in the form of offsetting tax cuts. The fossil-fuel industry would get smaller, government would not get bigger and businesses would be free to adapt as they see fit— including, even, ExxonMobil.7 Crude awakening ExxonMobil and the oil industry are making a bet that could end up wrecking the climate Leaders.

關(guān)鍵就在于向中立派們表明，降低排放量很有效并且不會(huì)使情況更糟。雖然民主黨的綠色新政引起了大家的關(guān)注，但因?yàn)檫@項(xiàng)政策是基于政府支出以及中央計(jì)劃的大量增長，就注定了它的失敗。美國以及其他國家的最好政策就是對碳排放征稅，?？松梨谝仓С诌@個(gè)提議。法國的黃背心運(yùn)動(dòng)也證實(shí)了這項(xiàng)政策將會(huì)多么難以實(shí)施。十分需要人才來設(shè)計(jì)能夠通過抵稅來獲得公眾支持的政策。石油產(chǎn)業(yè)將會(huì)縮減，政府不會(huì)擴(kuò)大，商業(yè)將會(huì)隨意接受計(jì)劃---包括埃克森美孚石油覺醒計(jì)劃，并且石油產(chǎn)業(yè)將會(huì)打賭結(jié)束破壞氣候。

TIPS:斜體是我翻譯的覺得有問題的地方，歡迎大家指正！

? ? ? ? 粗體是生詞

? ? ? ? ? 喜歡我的翻譯的請支持一下吧~讓我們一起加油！