In 1992, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change rightly called for a stabilisation of greenhouse gas concentrations at a level that would prevent dangerous climate change. The UN Climate talks that have just begun in Paris can and should underpin¹ the decarbonisation of the global economy needed to meet that goal.

1992年，《联合国气候变化框架公约》(UNFCCC)提出了一项正确的呼吁，即将温室气体浓度稳定在一个水平上，以防止危险的气候变化。刚刚在巴黎启动的联合国气候谈判能够而且也应该巩固全球经济脱碳，以实现这一目标。

Signatories to the convention have agreed to limit global warming to no more than 2C, or 1.5C if the emerging science justifies² it. To have a two-thirds probability of meeting the 2C target, total CO emissions³ between 2011 and 2100 have to be less than 950bn tons. Emissions from energy need to fall from about 35bn tons this year to 10-15bn tons by 2050, and to zero by about 2070.

公约签署国已达成共识，将气温上升幅度限制在2摄氏度以内，或者（如果新兴科学能够证明这个数字合理）1.5摄氏度以内。要使实现“2度”目标的可能性达到三分之二，2011年到2100年的总二氧化碳排放量就必须少于9500亿吨。到2050年，能源方面的排放量需要从今年的大约350亿吨下降到100亿至150亿吨，并在2070年前后达到接近零排放的水平。

Such decarbonisation is achievable with current technologies. The cost will be modest assuming significant technological⁴ improvements that are within reach, through a combination of targeted research and learning by doing.

当前的技术是能够实现这一脱碳目标的。假如技术能够取得长足的进步，成本将不会太高。而通过针对性研究和边做边学，这样的技术进步也在我们力所能及的范围内。

A global collaboration⁵ of energy research teams has identified the steps that need to be taken by 16 countries that are major emitters. The proposals all involve better energy efficiency, through smart buildings, power grids⁶ and transport. They rely on low-carbon power, such as wind, solar, nuclear, geothermal or hydroelectric. They entail⁷ eliminating carbon-based fuels: vehicles and planes must switch to electricity, hydrogen fuel cells or advanced biofuels; industry must swap⁸ heating oil for electricity and fuel cells.

全球多个能源研究团队通过合作确定了16个主要排放国需要采取的措施。这些建议都涉及通过智能建筑、电网和运输实现更高能效；依赖风能、太阳能、核能、地热能或者水力发电等低碳能源；消除碳基燃料：车辆和飞机需要切换到电力、氢燃料电池或者更先进的生物燃料；工业必须将燃油换成电力和燃料电池。

As for the technology, one priority is improved batteries for home appliances, electric vehicles and electricity grids. Another is carbon capture, and a way to use carbon dioxide to make synthetic⁹ fuels using renewable energy. A third is “smart” electricity grids, based on metering and feedback. Finally, publicly accepted nuclear power.

至于技术方面，一个优先事项是改善家用电器电池、电动汽车和电网。另一项是碳捕获，以及利用二氧化碳和可再生能源制造合成燃料。第三项是基于监测和反馈的“智能”电网。最后是公众接受核能。

An agreement is needed to prevent countries from freeriding on the efforts of others, to facilitate co-operation on technology and to provide public goods such as climate financing for poor countries. Yet the multilateral system has failed repeatedly; success is not assured.

需要达成协议，以防止一些国家在其他国家采取努力的情况下“搭便车”，促进技术合作，为贫穷国家提供气候融资等公共产品。然而，多边体系一再失败；这一次也无法保证能够成功。

The UN convention required rich countries to move first, but until now the US Senate has insisted that China move together with America. Last year China agreed, even committing to provide climate finance for poor countries. For the first time since 1992, the US, China and the EU are aligned¹⁰.

联合国气候变化框架公约》要求富裕国家首先采取行动，但直至现在，美国参议院一直坚持要求中国与美国一同行动。去年，中国表态同意，还更进一步，承诺为穷国提供气候融资。自1992年以来，美国、中国和欧洲首次协调一致。

Leaders must reaffirm the 2C limit in Paris, and check every five years whether a tougher one is needed. They should commit to decarbonisation this century and explain by 2018 how they intend to pursue it to 2050. Major economies must spend more on research and development, and say how they will pay for at least $100bn a year in additional climate financing for low-income countries by 2020. The deal they strike should be reviewed every five years.

各国领导人必须在巴黎气候大会上重申“2度”的上限，并且每五年确认是否需要一个更严格的上限。他们必须承诺在本世纪脱碳，并且在2018年解释为实现这一目标到2050年的行动计划。主要经济体必须在研发方面投入更多资金，并且说明它们将如何在2020年前每年至少拿出1000亿美元，为低收入国家提供额外的气候融资。达成的协议应该每5年进行一次审核。

For years, sceptics have attacked climate science. Now they attack the Paris conference itself — wrongly alleging¹¹ that the needed technologies do not yet exist or arguing, illogically, that climate change is a low priority or that adaptation is better than prevention. They quibble absurdly with specific reduction pledges made in advance of Paris, pretending that these would be the final word until the end of this century.

多年来，持怀疑态度的人都在攻击气候科学。现在他们攻击巴黎气候大会本身——他们错误地声称所需的技术还不存在，或者不合逻辑地主张气候变化不需要优先考虑，或者适应比预防更好。他们荒谬地对巴黎气候大会之前所做的具体减排承诺吹毛求疵，假装这些直到本世纪末都将是最终定论。

This is word play, not serious analysis of what can be done, should be done and may well emerge from Paris. The governments there will pay little attention to such scepticism.

这是文字游戏，而不是对人们能够做的、应该做的以及巴黎大会可能成果的严肃分析。参加这次大会的各国政府不会在意这些怀疑。