伦敦邱园皇家植物园
2021年7月20日
谢谢你，罗宾，对我的如此精彩的介绍。各位先生、各位女士，我接受诸位的提名。（笑）
我非常感谢罗宾的出席。我非常欣赏查塔姆研究所(Chatham House)杰出的工作，因此万分感谢您的参与。
阿梅莉亚·福赛特女爵(Dame Amelia Fawcett)，我的波士顿同乡，感谢您的热情欢迎。从您举世闻名的种子库项目到模型工作，我才刚见过一位您的工程师，邱园(Kew)为气候和生物多样性挑战做出历历可数的贡献。我们万分感谢您的努力。
各位先生、各位女士，我向您们保证，虽然我们今天要谈的是温室效应，但是我们可没有故意让各位坐在温室里。各位请便，我想我待会儿也会脱掉西装外套。谢谢了。
让我介绍两位嘉宾。我要向伦敦市长萨迪克·汗(Sadiq Khan)致谢，他是C40领导人之一，与来自世界各地的市长共事。市长先生，感谢您的到来。
另一位是我时任外交关系委员会主席和国务卿时的老友，他当时任职环保部长。艾德·米利班德(Ed Miliband)也来了，我们感谢他今天作为影子部长、影子政府代表出席。
很清楚的，我们举办会议的时间正当大流行艰难时刻。新冠疫情危机仍使得太多人面临患重症、住院、死亡的风险。虽然不凡的疫苗开发技术对危机有所减缓，但是我们显然还未能安然度过。我很遗憾必须说，如果这个世界无法设法解决、进而制止气候危机，新冠疫情的苦痛将扩大数以倍计。时不容我坐以待之，等到疫情消逝后再来应对气候挑战。
因此，很高兴再次回到英国。在这里，我的朋友阿洛克·夏尔马(Alok Sharma)和他的团队全心筹备主办联合国气候变化大会，今年11月将于格拉斯哥(Glasgow)登场的第26次缔约方大会(COP26)。我特别感谢能与诸位共聚于这个令人赞叹的会场，这是个美丽的地方，它同时是对大自然之美，又是对其之脆弱富有生命力的礼赞。
应对全球气候危机的努力就好比这地方，如此简单，又如此深奥。事关保护和守护我们共有的脆弱世界。了解对气候危机无所为所要付出的代价远高于有所为。这绝非夸大其词，事关存亡与否。
但是，如何履行我们集体责任的问题里深陷着一个政治问题，无关伙伴关系或意识形态，只不过是我们的机构是否有能耐团结一致，做出一番翻天覆地的大事业。
而那也是伦敦遗产可以让我们从中获益匪浅的。
年轻的我，在欧洲待得够久，学会了不能将欧洲大陆的稳定视为理所当然。我的外祖父是一名美国商人，当二战暴风雨前乌云聚集之时，以美国、英国和法国为家。我的母亲和她的家人在占领军步步推进时，逃离法国。他们的房子最终被炸毁、烧成灰烬。我才四岁时，我的母亲便带着我去造访废墟，那是她战争开打后，第一次回去。所有几乎荡然无存，就一栋烧的只剩石制楼梯的房屋骨架耸立在天地之间。那是我最早的记忆。
我之所以提到它，是因为我很庆幸有这段记忆。就像我这世代大部分的人，在我成长的过程中，打从心里了解这世界是差一点就变成一片混沌，了解盟国和联盟致力于重建秩序和开放、共同利益和价值观才扭转了情势：不只是避免又一次的冲突，还将支离破碎的世界治愈并将之重建。
今天所存在的世界秩序不是突发奇想而来的。它是那些决定要确保我们不会，再也不会，如此靠近深渊边缘的领导人和国家建立起来的。
那段历程总是给我如石般的信心，同心齐力我们真的可以解决人类最大的威胁。
气候危机，朋友们，是我们的时代考验，虽然有些人仍认为它像慢动作般的缓慢发展，大错特错。这个考验，此时就如同过去的任何一个，急迫且攸关存亡。
世界各地的年轻人呼吁大人们要有大人样，尽好最基本的责任，本不应该是如此讽刺的。年轻人被逼着放下课本，走出教室，为了气候而来罢课。他们了解全球响应不够快，来应对并非他们所造成的存亡威胁，但他们可能要冒着要扛起最终负担的风险：在他们有生之年，生活在一个越发不适合居住的星球，住在无法居住的社区。
他们眼里是怎么看这个全球政治体制的？所有关于价值观和构建的大话对这个世代的人无济于事，因为天天伴着他们长大的是日益危险、现已成为无可否认的气候危机现实，而几乎各地的政治体系三十多年都无法充分应对。
我参与过那一段历程。1988年，当吉姆·汉森(Jim Hansen)作证气候在发生变化时，我在。1992年，第一届地球峰会在里约召开时，我在。那是第一届，现在都第二十六届了。
也难怪他们那代人没有信心这个世界可以、也会往前行，这个世界做得到、也将能有所作为。也难怪那些年轻人质疑我们到哪儿去了。这世界可以、也将迎难而上，虽说事实是它还未起而行。至少那可能性还在。
念旧我们父母那代人的成就绝无法解开年轻人焦虑，或平息他们对我们这代人到目前为止无所成的愤怒。
我们这些大人们，无论是有立法或选举权的、在多边组织、在白宫战情室和董事会有一席之地，提出的答案必须是具体的，不能是理论的。更重要的是，我们必须有所行动，必须立即起而行。
因为时间不多了。这不是含蓄委婉，也不是夸大其词，真的时间不多了。
六年前，巴黎协定把所有国家兜拢在一起。我有幸领导我们的谈判团队。当时的目标是将地球的总升温限制在“远低于”摄氏2度，并努力朝向1.5度的方向前进。根据该协定，各个国家致力于完成自主决定贡献，同心协力，将世界带上正确的道路。
没错，该协定是在面临全球威胁时，所展现历史性的团结，而它在今天是有某些作为的。
各国所提的初始目标可将升温整整减少摄氏1度。光是达到这一点就已是关键的进展，将我们从无法想象的危险未来边缘拉了回来。但是我们现在也要诚实面对的是，我们共同设计的有限性。
因为巴黎协定的根本事实是，就算各国履行初始承诺，先别提很多都还未做到，就算每个人都做到在巴黎的承诺，这个星球仍会升温摄氏2.5或3度。
我们已经见识到升温1.2度的巨大后果。试想再升温一倍的情形。如果还去想再升温一倍，那是自找天大的麻烦。
我不是个会夸大其词的人，也不是个会危言耸听的人，但是我相信科学。2加2等于4。答案仍旧是4，虽然有些政客会要你去辩答案会不会是5，然后白白浪费我们所有的时间和精力。
巴黎之后这么多年，科学界现在已经得出结论，就连协定中“远低于2度”的目标也不足以阻挡气候混乱现象。具深远意义的2018年政府间气候变化专门委员会(IPCC)报告阐述地很清楚，就算达不到1.5度，我们也必须尽可能的将升温控制在越靠近1.5度。如果温度上升更多，那我们星球上的生命将会越来越无法辨识。
当我们细数今日所居住的世界，明日可能不适合居住的景象时，应该是，起码我认为，令人为之一惊、当头棒喝，让人为之清醒。
今天，我们共有的世界已经面临更频繁、更强烈的飓风和台风，摧毁家园、商区和社区。就在上周，如此强烈的降雨淹没位于德国、荷兰和比利时的社区，夺取数百人的性命，数千人将费时多年面临艰苦的善后恢复工作。奈及利亚和乌干达在最近几周也才经历过大规模毁灭性洪灾。
今天，在我们共有的世界，熊熊大火漫烧澳大利亚和美西，甚至俄罗斯的冻土也在烧，就连亚马孙雨林也在烧。
我们共有的世界，创纪录的热浪迫使城市设置解暑中心、造成道路变形、疾病剧增、每年造成数千人死于高温相关的死因。极端已成家常便饭，像在二月份，北极圈内的西伯利亚达到炽热的华氏118度，南极达到华氏70度。
我们所居住的世界，以前农作物会生长的地方，现在都长不起来了；海洋的化学成分变化比以前任何时候都来的多、来的快，数百万人被迫迁离日渐无法居住的家乡，每年全球可能有两千万人因而迁徙。我们都知道几年前的迁徙所造成的政治影响，但是仍旧在发生。试想当所有地方都变得无法居住，人们敲打着可以居住的地方的门，那会是什么样的情况。
这些都是实实在在的影响，而且大部分，朋友们，都是不可逆转的。那是科学家告诉我的，不可逆转。除非我们有所改变，否则在不久的将来，这世界该是多么骇人。
2100年的世界，那是我们子孙辈生活的世界，离现在就只剩80年了。
这样的一个世界，其主要城市，雅加达、孟买、上海、威尼斯、曼谷、新奥尔良，还有许许多多其他的，都需要注入数万亿美元建造基础设施，才能度过一次又一次地洪水泛滥和涨潮。
这样的一个世界，海洋酸化更严重、更缺氧，虽说我们人类呼吸的氧气51%来自海洋。如此的一个海洋，对海洋生物越来越恶劣、大部分的热带珊瑚礁消逝踪影，进而无法在暴风雨来临时为数百万生物提供庇护和粮食安全。
这样的一个世界，北极的夏天可能不再有冰。
这样的一个世界，超过1/3的人口面临频率前所未有、为时更久的热浪。
这样的一个世界，农民和建筑工人在室外工作，就要冒着中暑的危险。
一个时辰便降下一个月的雨量将成为常态。
干旱长达数月之久，而且更频繁，使得数亿人饱受淡水稀缺之苦。只要看看喜马拉雅融雪，阿尔卑斯山和其他的山脉，那是世界大河大川的源头注水；长江、黄河、湄公河、恒河，数十亿人依河而居。
这样一个世界，数代生长的农作物不再。
疟疾传播和罹患其他慢性疾病的条件剧增，像我们今天仍在奋力抗击的大流行真的会变得更加普遍。
把这些所有的统计数字相加起来，就变成一片混沌的世界。这样的一个世界，所有的国家会因为经济成长停滞、饥饿、饥荒、为争夺资源而加剧冲突、人们被迫放弃家园，而不再稳定。只要看看在德国需要数十亿美元纾困的人们。几年前，我们才为了三个暴风雨而进行纾困，花了2.65亿美元。但是，我们竟筹不到1亿美元来履行巴黎协定中的义务。
我们所看到的这个世界，是我们花大钱、激发潜力和放入精力，只为了应付灾难，却不能对明日做出投资。这有损我们所奋斗的一切。而且，没有任何一个国家，无论贫富，得以躲过。
有件事是可以确定的：我刚刚所描述的不是科幻小说的世界。那是科学家告诉我们,如果无法降低温室气体排放和污染的话，那将是本世纪末的现实。我们已经被警告过了，所有科学家跟我们提过未来30年会发生的情况，现在已经开始了，只是比预测的更大、更快。
你不用作为一名科学家就能知道，将这样一个世界作为遗产留给后代，是任何一个做父母的都不可能满意的。
所有的事实、证据和科学都很清楚，我们能避免那样的未来的时机窗口已经很窄了。我们还是可以避免的。但是我们必须以真切的急迫感来行动，集结这星球上所有的国家。
简单地说：世界必须减少排放，特别是温室气体二氧化碳，到2030年必须至少减少45%，才能迈上可靠的科学道路，到本世纪中期达到净零排放。那是IPCC给我们看的。45%，不是只有在某些国家或地区，而是全球上下。
这将是个决定性的十年。2021年是个决定性的一年。
最重要的是，必须让今年在格拉斯哥举办的第26届缔约国大会成为关键时刻，让全世界团结在一起，因应并掌控气候挑战。
本周是格拉斯哥倒数100天，我上任拜登总统气候变化特使已六个月，拜登总统重新加入巴黎协定，承诺他的政府将致力于更大胆的气候行动已六个月。
经过4年的缺席后，朋友们，我们以谦逊之心应对这个挑战，但是，我要说清楚，我们将以雄心应对。我们知道我们无法挽救过去，或是挽回失去的四年时间，丘吉尔会以“那些被蝗虫吃尽的年头”来描述。但是现在，美国的新总统大胆地挺身弥补错失的时间，这是个重要的分界线时刻来评估我们的处境、还有多少时间来完成工作。
为了迎接挑战，在4月举办的领导人气候变化峰会中，美国宣布未来10年饶富雄心的目标，到2030年，将减排50-52%。拜登总统也宣布大胆的政策加以支持，不是说说而已，是实干。端起今天的报纸，你会看到为了基础设施和未来的奋斗。他计划到2030年在美国全国设置50座电动汽车充电站。他设下到2035年建立无碳发电产业的目标，投入350亿美元进行清洁能源研究、开发和示范项目，并且不晚于2050年达到净零排放，也许更快。
我们正以立法和监管行动迈向这些目标，包括与国会一起为发展中国家提供前所未有聚焦于气候的协助资源。
我们之所以如此做是因为我们知道，没有任何一个国家或大陆可以单打独斗解决气候危机。
因此，我们和盟友、伙伴、竞争者，甚至对手一起，所有人都太了解不过了，今日所发生的某些事情形成威胁，将一笔抹煞这么多人奋力取得的进展。
多么骇人听闻的是，朋友们，当我们在跟格拉斯哥赛跑时，有些国家还在建造会造成碳污染的新燃煤电厂，甚至计划未来破土兴建更多间。
在这个时刻，当许多国家致力于植树作为基于自然的解决方案时，其他国家事实上把树砍的一干二净，继续非法、非法砍伐雨林。他们移除的是世界的肺脏，破坏无法替换的生物多样性，这里是世界上最了解这一点的地方，并且造成气候不稳定，这些都是同步发生的。
多么不理性的是，跟十年前相比，有些国家的煤，事实上是烧的更多、太阳能用的更少，虽说清洁能源的成本已经降到远低于化石燃料。
套句爱因斯坦的话，疯狂就是明知道会因而致死，但仍一意孤行。
我们承担不起一个以如此分歧的方式因应气候危机的世界，因为证据足以说服采取行动。
我们必须做出选择，携手一道。生活就是做选择。你们全都知道，每个人都知道，治理也是如此，领导也亦然，这个时刻也是如此要求我们。
二次大战期间和之后，领导人做该做的事，把工作做好。美国终于参展之后，丘吉尔在每晚的日记里，写的不是我们多么不情愿，或是我们花了多久才做出决定。他简简单单写道“今天，我们赢了。”罗斯福(Roosevelt)，和丘吉尔一样，强烈憎恶苏联体制，完全不难想象二十世纪的后半阶段极有可能由冷战来定义。但是他们未曾犹豫与苏联建立联盟，因为没有其他法子可在奋战中得胜，当时他们二人正确地做出事关存亡的判断。
一夜之间，国内和世界各地的酿酒厂被改装，为喷射机和坦克车生产燃料。福特汽车公司，在密西根州的一家工厂，每小时出厂一架B24轰炸机。我们重新整备经济。我们对一个政策制定者不只将之称之为攸关存亡的威胁做出响应，而且用行动来表现它真的是个威胁。你听过多少人说过“哦，气候变化是个存亡危机” ？但是有多少地方真的将它视为危机来因应呢？
战后，难民人数创下纪录，欧洲大陆饱受饥饿和灾难之苦，基础设施荡然无存，全世界再一次一致行动，仿佛应对存亡威胁。我们不互扯后腿，反而利用马歇尔计划(Marshall Plan)齐心协力，重建一个至今我们仍然受益的秩序。
这正是我们现在该做的：正视气候危机已演变成的危机程度，加以响应，好比战时总动员，天大的机会在COVID-19疫情后，重建我们的经济，“建设地更好”。你们在这次的疫情后听过多少次这个词了？
那是我们必须要处处参与的使命，过去六个月我如是做，我向你保证，接下来的100天我也会如此。
让我清楚地说，我们，我要说的非常明白，因为有些国家对于所被要求去做的事提出关切。事实是，我们不是说每个国家必须、将要或者可以做同样的事情，他们不能。我们说的是每个国家可以做足、在能力范围内适当做到，来帮助我们专心打赢这场仗。不是因为这是地区之间、国家之间的相互竞争，而是因为我们真的是风雨同舟。
本十年迈出最大的一步就是要扩展全球清洁能源经济。能源占全球温室气体排放的3/4。我们的家用电、汽车用电等等。
到2030年，我们必须加速部署既有清洁技术，将之快马加鞭，部署、部署、再部署。根据国际能源署(International Energy Agency)，那表示：
第二，我们必须也要在这个十年内，开发、示范项目、扩展新兴技术，好让他们能够到2050年在全球经济去碳化中扮演主要角色。从现在到2030年，国际能源署表示：
第三，如果我们大力投入清洁能源，并且提升能效抑制全球能源需求，那么对化石燃料的需求自然而然将会减少。从现在开始，国际能源署告诉我们，我们事实上不需再对石油、煤炭和天然气进行新的投资，我们不见得需要它们来满足我们的能源需求，因为其他的科技要不已经在线上，就是将会在线上。
到2040年，我们应当整个淘汰未使用碳捕集和封存技术的煤电和石油厂，并且锐幅减少对未使用该技术的天然气发电厂的依赖。
好消息是，朋友们，我们周遭全是我们做得到的证明。清洁能源技术已经比化石燃料低廉，我们现在手边就有将之如法炮制到各种新兴清洁能源的做法。
太阳能成本在过去十年大减90%。岸上风能成本直降70%。而今天，风能和太阳能在占全球GDP 77%的国家中，已成为最廉价的新电力来源。去年，中国和美国，世界上最大的两个排放国，安装的可再生能源创下纪录，虽说有着疫情的影响。世界上90%的新电力都来自可再生能源。因此，我们知道，我们做得到。
可再生能源技术成本下降，因为政府和私营企业对研究、开发和示范项目的投资。
美国能源部在2011年开启SunShot项目以期在十年内将太阳能成本减少75%。因为美国和世界的先进技术，提前三年达到这个目标。
借由这个经验，拜登政府将启动一系列的“为地球奋斗”(Earthshot)项目来降低新技术的成本，刺激研究人员和企业的创新能力。如果到2030年，我们能做到“为地球奋斗”项目目标,就能为清洁能源革命注入大幅动力。
激发灵感的创新已经从研究实验室中浮现，吸引民间投资，进入商业市场。全固态电池的突破将可使电动车的驾驶距离远于传统的燃油汽车，且充电如闪电般快速。新一代的光伏电池利用太阳的发电量将更大，而且成本将只是今日已经很廉价的技术的一小部分。
我们势不可挡。我们方向正确。我们只是不知道何时才能到达我们必须到的地方。
要达到全球净零排放意味着全球必须进行工业革命以来最大的转型，但也有着最大的经济展望。
但是能源产业并非全球减排的唯一驱动力。其他领域也是关键，例如终止非法森林砍伐以管控利用土地所产生的排放。
越来越多的国家开始壮大气候行动的承诺，而他们人民和经济也因而受益。
在4月份全球以视频方式在华盛顿举办的峰会上，加拿大将2030年的目标从30%提升到40-45%，现在正着手规划执行路线图。日本也加码承诺减排46-50%。
这些强劲的宣布都是跟进欧盟到2030年减排55%和英国同期内减排68%令人印象深刻的承诺。
在英国这里，你们展现如何将经济价值和气候行动保持一致，为未来制定10点绿色工业计划，包括从离岸风能到清洁氢能到飞机燃油等等。
像德国这样的国家，已经做出重要贡献带动降低全球太阳能成本曲线，并且大规模部署可再生能源。
这些林林总总加起来意味着什么呢? 4月份举行峰会之前和期间，占全球GDP 55%的所有国家所宣布的2030年承诺与维持升温在1.5度之内全球所需的步伐一致。
随着我们与其他各国进行会晤，这势头在全世界持续进行着。
韩国和南非皆维持在格拉斯哥大会前加强各自气候目标的道路上。
一些世界上石油和天然气的主要生产商也传达将有所行动的信号。
俄罗斯刚刚就积极执行巴黎协定控温目标和全球追求净零排放和我们取得一致，这是过去他们从未采纳过的。在我上周访问莫斯科之后，我们宣布共同承诺“在本十年付出重大努力”来限制全球变暖。
沙特阿拉伯也与我们一道申明这个重要性，“在2020年代减排和采取适应行动的重要性，才能避免气候变化带来最糟糕的后果”。
在阿联酋召开、具地标性、由十个中东和北非国家与会的地区对话中，包括多个石油生产国，各国均异口同声同意“到2030年，要减排”。
没错，这些都只是嘴上说的，我们很清楚。但是他们是个开端，令人鼓舞的话语。接下来的100天，我们可以其为基础。
所进行的对话已经从半生不熟的措施演变成要怎么做，才能把事情做好。
例如，开始动员主要行为者 “踩刹车”减少甲烷排放，一种短寿命但强效的温室气体，破坏性甚于二氧化碳数倍之多。
但是面临的挑战是：虽说世界上55%都同意参与建立控温于1.5度的未来，包括我刚刚提到的许多国家，虽然如此，我们仍旧还有许多待办的事情。
大自然对各个国家造成地球变暖的排放是一视同仁的。在她将我们陷于干旱、大火或洪水前，大自然对于来自欧洲、美国、中国的温室气体是不予区别的。大自然只是，明显地表现出，所受到影响和记录对大气的排放。而对我们集体命运最要紧的是，所有气体的总和以及我们共同的排放轨迹。
这就使我们不得不正视世界与中国的关系。
那些认为因为我们之间的分歧，因此应该避免在气候变化上和中国打交道的人，我要说一句，那是完全不可能的，无论是从数学或是意识形态的角度，想要解决气候危机，又不要一个今日排放量居全球榜首占28%的国家的全面合作和领导。国际能源署已经算出全球必须做出的减排，统计数字暗示着如果中国按照目前的计划，要等到2030年才能达峰，那么全世界其他国家便必须达到零排放，零排放，而且必须要在2040年，甚至2035年做到。那全世界起码短少了10年可用来去碳化的时间。朋友们，那是一个以目前情况而言无法达到的目标。因此，很重要的是我们，也就是美国，第二大排放国，和中国，以及全世界其他国家，都要在这个关键工作上往同一个方向前进。
在非常短暂的时间中，中国成就了前所未有的经济成长。但是这个成长的基石是用数量惊人的化石燃料换来的。作为一个大国，一个经济龙头，现在是造成气候变化最大的驱动因素，中国完全可以帮助领导世界迈向成功，做到在这关键的2020到2030年间，尽早达峰并开始减排。我会这样说单纯只是因为科学事实。事实是，没有其他替代方案了，因为如果没有中国进行足够减排，再加上我们其他国家一道努力，控温1.5度的目标基本上是不可能的。在这个后果不比寻常的国际议题上，中国的伙伴关系和领导是必不可少的。
有一点很重要的是，尽管中国继续以令人担忧的速度建造燃煤电厂和为其提供经费，但是中国在其境内所做的基本上超过其所作出的国际承诺。
随着中国的“十四五”计划细节不断扩展，世界各地的专家都相信他们可以找到更多机会加速减排，经济不会因而失去或放缓，而且也不会被要求做一些不公平的事情。我相信做出更高的承诺以可再生能源取代大量的煤，他们的表现会更好。
应该对甲烷排放、更快过渡到电动车、更严格的建筑法规，以及可以提供多种展现清洁能源经济领导力可能性的工业工艺，予以更多的注意力。
习主席去年在联合国宣布中国将“提高”国家自主贡献。我们希望在他们的“十四五”计划中将包括具体产业和近期行动，以便尽早日达峰以及之后快速减排的可能。
很明显的，中国和美国有甚多分歧已不是什么秘密了。但是在气候上，合作，是可以摆脱世界目前相互自杀约定唯一的方法。
拜登总统和习主席均明确表达两人将在气候议题上合作，纵使还有其他巨大影响的分歧。美国需要中国成功地削减排放，而中国需要美国同样做到它该做的。我们可以保障一个合理的气候未来最好的机会就是，中国和美国一同努力。最好的方式就是列出具体、具雄心、近期的减排目标，然后制定认真的政策予以支持，一同努力，为世界设立榜样，指出我们该往哪里走、怎么走。
印度，全球第三大排放国，设定令人印象深刻的目标到2030年建造450吉瓦可再生能源。这个目标对全球追求控温1.5度是真的很关键，因为如果没有快速过渡到清洁能源，印度的排放将在2040年超过美国。
这就是为什么和总理穆迪(Modi)会晤之际，我们与印度达成新的伙伴关系，2030美国-印度气候与清洁能源议程伙伴关系(U.S.-India Agenda 2030 Partnership)，由拜登总统和穆迪总理在峰会中启动。要部署可再生能源必须诉诸于具体行动。我们正在努力动员数十亿美元新投资，对印度新兴的清洁能源的新投资。
虽然，有些人仍旧辩称今天的困境不是印度造成的，为什么执行解决方案时，它也得出份力？我刚刚才解释过，这整个过程是不分排放来自何方。不过更重要的是，解决气候变化的方案是自工业革命以来，我们在这星球上所见过最巨大的经济机遇。而且，事实是，气候危机的后果并不会专门保留给最需负起责任的那些国家。
因此，没有每一个世界主要经济体一起行动，没有其他剩下的45%一起参与，绝不可能达到控温1.5度之内。
我们也必须注意到特别脆弱国家的需求和希望。这个过程必须是公平的，不能只是有能力来响应的发达国家而已。事实上是，20个国家总和相当于75-80%的所有排放量。所以，当有些国家指责说,“等等，这不是我们造成的，但是我们却深受其害”,他们是对的。对那些气候变化意味着攸关存亡火烧眉头的，我们有所响应是事关根本的平等和公平。为此，拜登总统承诺到2024年，我们对适应工作的资金支援将增为三倍。我们正和伙伴们一道努力，在格拉斯哥召开时，强化对巴黎融资协定和承诺的集体支援。
至于世界上的新兴经济体，说句公道话，发展对你们而言的确是首当之务，我要说的是我们将帮助你们开垦出自己的繁荣道路。不是重蹈过去污染的道路，而是有赖于技术清洁、可持续的未来。
至于主要经济体，我们就明说吧：责任在我们。我们是过去最大的排放国，今日最大的排放国，我们要发挥最大的作用将世界从气候灾难的边缘拉回来。
我们所有的人都有漫长的路要走。
但是，我们着手做的同时，也知道机会是跟着来的。那是私营部门今天告诉我们的，逐渐朝向可持续投资前进。
他们承诺现在投入数万亿美元，让气候变化成为投资策略的核心。
同时，虽说COVID-19搞了一场浩劫，世界也看到我们在2020年得以产出的可再生能源，以前所未有的速度增加。
所以，想想吧，朋友们，世界上最值钱的汽车企业，特斯拉。它就只生产电动车。
三菱(Mitsubishi)正在兴建全球最大的零排放钢铁厂，坐落在奥地利。
他们知道气候行动意味着黄金机遇。
但是它不是自发的。它不是自动的。它不是注定好的。
250家企业，举例来说吧，占全球排放的1/3，但是还有41家还未设定减排目标。
因此，我们必须配套，我们必须将政策与潜力匹配起来。过两天，我们将举行部长级会议以筹备10月份召开的二十国集团(G20)会议。我们将相见于意大利，缔约国大会的共同主席国。本周世界最大排放国会议的成功能有助于铺平11月份全世界聚集在格拉斯哥的成功大道。
全世界都会看着他们的所作所为。
我们需要二十国集团的领导，无论是所说的话或所做的事，如此一来，全世界才能在格拉斯哥负起领导的角色。
朋友们，我们还有时间重新实现升温1.5度较安全的未来。
但是唯有每一个主要经济体做出到2030年有意义的减排承诺，那是唯一能让全世界迈向在本世纪中期达到全球净零排放可靠的道路。
在第26届缔约国大会召开或之前，我们必须看到世界上主要经济体，不只是很有雄心或设定雄心勃勃的目标，而是必须有明确的计划，如何在接下来的十年内达到该目标。到2023年，我们需要同样的这些经济体列出路线图，展现如何到2050年，达到净零排放。
承诺必须要有具体的国家行动计划来支撑。光说不练的时间早已过去。我们需要配套适当的投资，来自于公私部门，我们必须认真重新思考多边开发银行程序，要如何去风险、如何分配资本，以及如何找到出路。
我们可以，也必须，一起做到，尤其是当我们心知肚明我们的选择造就的两种世界所会带来的胜利和悲剧。我相信我们将能成就我们迫切需要的低碳经济，只是我还不知道我们是否能及时做到。
每当我们知道这是全世界最需要的时候，我们总会做到。我们可以同心协力的。
但是一切操之在我们，向我们自己、向在街头抗议的那一代人证明，我们准备好好再做一次。我们是解决问题的人，不光只会做梦，不只嘴上说说；我们是行动者，不是鸵鸟。
会用雄心勃勃的行动来支撑我们万丈雄心的言辞。
朋友们，地点就在格拉斯哥，时间就在2021。我们能够在一百多天内，拯救未来的数百年。谢谢。

JOHN KERRY, SPECIAL PRESIDENTIAL ENVOY FOR CLIMATE
ROYAL BOTANIC GARDENS, KEW, LONDON
JULY 20, 2021
Thank you Robin for a remarkably generous introduction. Ladies and gentlemen I accept the nomination. [laughter]
I really appreciate Robin being here and I’m a great admirer of the incredible work of Chatham House, so thank you very, very much for being part of this.
Dame Amelia Fawcett – fellow Bostonian – but thank you very much for a warm welcome.  From your world-renowned seed banking program to the modeling work that you do – I just met with one of your scientists – Kew is making measurable contributions to the challenge of climate and biodiversity.  And we thank you very, very much for those efforts.
I want to promise you, ladies and gentlemen, though we came here to talk about the greenhouse effect we did not intend to put you in a greenhouse.  And feel free I think I may take this off momentarily, but I appreciate it.
Let me introduce two guests – I’m very grateful to Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, who is one of the leaders in the C40 with mayors across the world.  Thank you Mr. Mayor for being here today.
And an old friend from his days as environment minister when I was Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and Secretary of State.  Ed Miliband is here and we appreciate as a shadow minister, the shadow government representative today.
So, obviously we’re meeting at a very difficult time in the pandemic.  And the COVID crisis still holds too many people at risk of severe illness, hospitalization, and death. And while the extraordinary technological development of vaccines is helping to ease the crisis, we are obviously not yet through it.  I am very sorry to say, the suffering of COVID will be magnified many times over in a world that does not grapple with and ultimately halt the climate crisis.  We don’t have the luxury of waiting until COVID is vanquished to take up the climate challenge.
So it’s good to be back in the UK – where my friend Alok Sharma and his team are hard at work, preparing to host the UN climate conference – COP26 in Glasgow this November.  And I am particularly grateful to join you in this remarkable setting – it’s an amazing place – which is both a living tribute to nature’s beauty, but also its fragility.
And fundamentally, the struggle to tackle the global climate crisis is just as simple and profound as this place. It’s about protecting and preserving the fragile world that we share.  It’s about understanding that it costs more not to respond to the climate crisis than it does to respond.  And it is, without exaggeration, about survival.
But within the question of how we meet our collective responsibility is a political question – not about partisanship or ideology, but about the simple capacity of our institutions to come together and to do big, transformative things.
And that is also something about which the legacy of London can tell us a great deal.
I spent enough time in Europe as a young person that I learned not to take stability on the continent for granted. My grandfather was an American businessman who raised his family between the U.S., the UK, and France as the storm clouds of World War II gathered.  My mother and members of her family fled France as an occupying army moved through the country. Their house was ultimately bombed and burned to the ground.  And when I was just 4 years old, my mother brought me there to visit the ruins – her first visit back since the war.  Almost nothing was left and a skeleton of a burned-out building rose into the sky with one stone staircase.  That is my earliest memory.
And I mention it because I’m glad I have it – because like most in my generation, I grew up with a visceral understanding of how close the world came to chaos – and how allies and alliances dedicated to order and openness, common interests and shared values made all the difference: not just to avert another conflict, but to heal and rebuild a shattered world.
The world order that exists today did not just emerge on a whim.  It was built by leaders and nations determined to make sure that never – never – again would we come so close to the edge of the abyss.
That journey has always given me a bedrock confidence that together we actually can solve humanity’s biggest threats.
The climate crisis – my friends – is the test of our own times, and while some may still believe it is unfolding in slow motion, no.  This test is now as acute and as existential as any previous one.
The irony should not be lost on us that it is young people around the world who are calling on adults to behave like adults and exercise their basic responsibilities.  Young people who feel forced to put down their schoolbooks and march out of the classroom to strike for climate.  They know the world is not responding fast enough to an existential threat they didn’t create, but for which they risk bearing the ultimate burden: uninhabitable communities on an increasingly unlivable planet in their lifetimes.
How must the global political system look through their eyes?  All the talk about values and architecture means little to a generation that has grown up every single day under the mounting danger and now the undeniable reality of a climate crisis to which the politics almost everywhere has failed to respond adequately for more than thirty years.
I’ve been part of that journey.  I was there in 1988 when Jim Hansen testified that it was happening.  I was in Rio in 1992 when we had the first Earth Summit.  That was number one.  Now we’re at number 26.
It’s no wonder their generation doesn’t share in the confidence that the world can and will move forward – the world can and will make a difference. It’s no wonder that those young people are wondering where we are. The world can and will rise to this occasion, despite the fact it hasn’t yet.  At least that possibility is still there.
Nostalgia for what our parents’ generation accomplished is absolutely no antidote to their anxiety of these young folk, and even their anger at what our generation has so far failed to do.
We adults who have a votes in legislatures or elections and multilateral institutions, seats in the Situation Room in the White House and the boardrooms – we must provide answers that are tangible – not theoretical.  And above all, we need to provide action and we need to do it now.
Because time is running out.  Not a euphemism, not an exaggeration, time is running out.
Six years ago, the Paris Agreement brought countries together, I had the privilege of leading our negotiating team, the goal was of limiting the total increase in the Earth’s temperature to “well below” two degrees Celsius and to pursue efforts towards 1.5.  Under the Agreement, each country committed to do what it determined by itself it was willing to do, collectively, to put the world on the right path.
Yes the Agreement was an historic show of unity in the face of a global threat, and it is making a difference today.
Countries put forward initial targets that would reduce warming by about a full degree Celsius.  Just achieving that was crucial progress, pulling us back from the brink of an inconceivably dangerous future.  But what we also have to be honest about now is the limits of what we engineered together.
Because the fundamental truth of the Paris Agreement is that even if every country fulfilled its initial promises –and many are falling short — even if everyone did what they said they would do in Paris, the temperature of this planet would still rise by upwards of 2.5 or 3 degrees centigrade.
We’re already seeing dramatic consequences with 1.2 degrees.  Imagine the doubling.  To contemplate doubling that is to invite catastrophe.
I’m not an exaggerator, I’m not an alarmist, but I do believe in science. Two and two is four.  It’s still four, despite the fact that some politicians want you to debate whether or not it’s five, and chew up all our time and energy.
Since the years since Paris, the scientific community has now determined that even the Agreement’s “well below 2 degrees” is not enough to stave off climate chaos.  A seminal 2018 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the IPCC, made clear that we must focus on capping warming as close as we can get to 1.5 degrees, if not 1.5.  Much more warming than that, and life on our planet will become increasingly unrecognizable.
And that prospect of an unlivable tomorrow, should be, I would think, as alarming as it is sobering as we take stock of the world we are living in today.
Already, today, we share a world in which more frequent and powerful hurricanes and typhoons destroy homes, businesses, and communities.  Just last week, a rainfall of such intensity that it flooded communities in Germany, Holland and Belgium leaving hundreds of dead and thousands facing years of difficult recovery.  Nigeria and Uganda also experienced massive, destructive flooding in recent weeks.
Today we share a world in which fiery conflagrations rampage across Australia and the American West and even the Russian tundra.  Even the rainforests of the Amazon are burning.
We share a world in which record heat waves force cities to install relief centers, cause roads to buckle, and illnesses to spike, resulting in thousands of heat-related deaths a year.  Where extremes are everyday fare, like Siberia reaching a scorching 118 degrees inside the Arctic Circle or Antarctica at 70 degrees Fahrenheit last February.
We’re living in a world where crops no longer grow where they always did before; the chemistry of the oceans changes more and faster than ever before – where millions of people are forced to leave increasingly uninhabitable homelands – maybe 20 million a year migrating around the world.  We all know that the political impact of migration was a few years ago, and still, imagine what happens when places become uninhabitable and people are knocking on the door of places where they know people can live.
These impacts are real and most of them, my friends, are irreversible.  That’s what the scientists told me – irreversible. But even more horrifying is what the world will look like in the near future unless we change course.
The world of 2100 – the world of our children and grandchildren, just 80 years from now.
A world where major cities – Jakarta, Mumbai, Shanghai, Venice, Bangkok, New Orleans, and many more – will need trillions of dollars in infrastructure just to survive repeated flooding and high tides.
A world in which the ocean is more acidic and starved for oxygen, despite the fact that we humans breathe 51 percent of our oxygen coming from the ocean.  An ocean that is increasingly hostile for marine life; devoid of most tropical coral reefs, and with that the loss of protection from storms and food security for millions.
A world in which the Arctic may not have any ice in the summer.
A world in which over 1/3 of the population will face longer-lasting heat waves with unprecedented regularity.
A world in which farmers and construction workers cannot work outside without risking heat-stroke.
Where a month’s worth of rain falling in an hour may become commonplace.
Where droughts last months longer and occur more frequently – and hundreds of millions of people suffer from freshwater scarcity.  Just look at the Himalayas melting – the Alps, the other mountains – the feeders of the great rivers of our world: the Yangtze, the Yellow River, the Mekong, the Ganges, the billions of people living along those riverbanks.
A world in which the crops families have grown for generations are no longer viable.
Where conditions for malaria transmission and other chronic illnesses skyrocket and pandemics like the one we continue to battle today actually become more prevalent.
So what all these statistics add up to would be a world in chaos.  It’s a world where whole countries would be destabilized from stalled economical growth, hunger, starvation, escalating conflict over resources, and people would be forced to abandon their homes.  Just look at the people in Germany needing billions of bailout.  We bailed out three storms a few years ago – $265 million dollars. But we couldn’t even find 100 million dollars to fulfill our obligation to the Paris Agreement.
So we’re looking at a world in which we ultimately spend so much money, the potential of the world, and effort just coping with disasters, that we can’t invest in tomorrow.  It undermines everything we have been fighting for.  And no country, rich or poor, will be spared.
So one thing is certain: everything I’ve just said is not the description of a world of science fiction.  It’s what scientists tell us will be reality by the end of this century if our emissions of greenhouse gasses, pollution, do not decline.  And we are forewarned – everything the scientists have been telling us now will happen for 30 years, is happening – but bigger and faster than was predicted.
And you don’t need to be a scientist to know that what we’re looking at is a world no parent would ever be content to leave behind as an inheritance for future generations.
Facts, evidence, and science all make clear that we have a narrow window to avoid that future.  We can still avoid it. But we have to begin to act with genuine urgency, bringing countries all across this planet together.
Simply put: the world needs to cut emissions – greenhouse gas CO2 emissions particularly – by at least 45% by 2030 in order to be on a credible scientific path by midcentury to net zero.  That’s what the IPCC showed us.  45% – not just in some countries or some regions, but the world over.  They found that 45% is the minimum that the world must reduce.
That makes this the decisive decade.  And it makes 2021 a decisive year.
And most of all, it must make COP 26 in Glasgow this year a pivotal moment for the world to come together to meet and master the climate challenge.
This week marks 100 days until Glasgow, six months into my time as President Biden’s Special Presidential Envoy for Climate – and six months since President Biden rejoined the Paris Agreement and committed his Administration to bold climate action.
After our absence for four years, my friends, we approach this challenge with humility, but – let me be clear – we approach it with ambition.  We know that we cannot redeem the past or retrieve four lost years – which in Churchill’s phrase could be described as “years the locusts have eaten.”  But now, a new American President is boldly moving to make up for lost time, and this is an important demarcation moment to assess where we all stand with the time that we have left to get the job done.
To meet the challenge, at the Leaders’ Summit in April, the United States announced an ambitious target of reducing our emissions over the next ten years, by 2030, we will reduce by 50-52 percent.  And President Biden has announced bold policies to back that up – it’s not rhetoric, it’s real.  Pick up the paper today and you’ll read about the fight that’s going on for infrastructure and for the future.  He’s planning to put 500,000 electric vehicle stations deployed by 2030 around our country.  He set a carbon-free power sector goal by 2035, investing $35 billion in clean energy research, development, and demonstration – and achieving net zero emissions no later than 2050, if not sooner.
We are moving to reach these goals with legislative and regulatory action, including working with Congress to achieve unprecedented resources for climate focused assistance for developing countries.
We do all this knowing full well that no country and no continent alone can solve the climate crisis.
So, we are working with allies, partners, competitors, and even adversaries all too aware that some things happening today threaten to erase the very progress that so many are struggling to advance.
How alarming it is, my friends, that as we race to Glasgow, some countries are currently still building new, carbon-polluting coal plants, and even planning to break ground on more in the future.
At a time when many countries are committed to plant more trees as a nature-based solution, other countries are actually clear-cutting more trees and continuing to illegally, illegally cut down the rainforest.  They are removing the lungs of the world, destroying irreplaceable biodiversity – of all the places in the world that’s understood here – and destabilizing the climate, all at the same time.
How irrational it is that that there are countries actually burning more coal and using less solar than they were a decade ago – even as the costs of clean energy have plummeted well below fossil fuel.
To paraphrase Einstein – Insanity is continuing to do something that will kill you even when you know it will.
We can’t afford a world so divided in its response to the climate crisis when the evidence is so compelling for action.
We have to make choices – together.  Life is about choices; you all know that – everybody does; so is governing; so is leading, so this moment requires.
In World War II and its aftermath, leaders did what they had to do to get the job done.  After the United States finally joined the War, Churchill didn’t lament in his nightly journal how reluctant that we’d been, or how long it had taken us; he wrote simply these words: “Today, we have won.”  Roosevelt, like Churchill, had a deep antipathy toward the Soviet system and it wasn’t hard to imagine the looming possibility of a Cold War that would define the second half of the twentieth century.  But they didn’t hesitate to form an alliance with the Soviets because there was no other way to prevail in the struggle, they both correctly identified at the time as existential.
Overnight, at home and around the world, distilleries were converted into producing fuel for jet planes and tanks.  A Ford Motor Company, a plant in Michigan, turned out one B24 bomber every hour.  We retooled our economy.  We responded to a threat that policy makers didn’t just call existential but acted like it really was.  How many people have you heard say “oh, climate change, an existential crisis”?  But how many places are responding as if it is?
After the war, with refugees at record numbers, with a continent gripped by hunger and devastation, its critical infrastructure wiped out – the world acted once again as if the threat was existential.  And instead of pulling each other apart, we pulled together with the Marshall Plan, the rebuilding of the order that has served us well since then.
That is precisely what we must do now: treat the climate crisis as the crisis it has become, and mount a response that is comparable to wartime mobilization, a massive opportunity to rebuild our economies after COVID-19, to  “Build Better.”  How many times have you heard that phrase after this pandemic?
That’s the mission everywhere that we are engaged in – for these last six months, and I promise you in these next 100 days.
Let me be clear, we are – I want to be very clear about this because there are countries that express concern about what they’re asked to do.  The fact is that we are not saying that every country must, will, or can do the same thing – they can’t – but we are saying that every country can do enough and can do what is appropriate within its ability to help us keep on track to win this battle.  Not because it’s one region, or one country against another, or competition, because we are literally all in this together.
And the biggest step of all this decade is scaling up the development of a global clean energy economy.  Energy accounts for three-quarters of global greenhouse gas emissions.  How we power our homes, how we power our cars, and so forth.
By 2030, we have to speed up the deployment of the clean technologies that we already have – put them on super steroids and deploy, deploy, deploy.  According to the International Energy Agency, that means:
Second, we must also need to develop, demonstrate, and scale up emerging technologies during this decade so that they can play a major role in decarbonizing the global economy by 2050.  Between now and 2030, the IEA says that:
And third, if we invest heavily in clean energy – and in energy efficiency that curbs rising global demand for energy – and then of course fossil fuels, the demand, will naturally drop.  Starting now, the IEA tells us that we do not actually need a new investment in oil, coal, or gas production – because they’re simply not necessary to meet our energy needs given other technologies that are online and coming online.
By 2040, we should have entirely phased out all unabated coal and unabated oil plants and sharply reduced reliance on unabated natural gas generation.
The good news, my friends, is that the proof is all around us that we can do it.  Clean energy technologies are already cheaper than fossil fuels – and we have a playbook to do the same thing across many other emerging clean technologies.
Over the last decade, the cost of solar power plummeted 90 percent.  The cost of onshore wind plunged 70 percent. And today, solar and wind power are the cheapest source of new electricity generation in countries accounting for 77 percent of global GDP.  Last year, China and the United States, the world’s two largest emitters, installed records amounts of renewable energy – despite the pandemic.  And 90% of the new electricity in the world came from renewables sources.  So we know we can do it.
Renewable energy technologies fell in cost as governments and private companies invested in research, development, and demonstration.
The U.S. Department of Energy launched the SunShot program in 2011 to drive down the cost of solar power by 75% in a decade. And thanks to advances in our country and around the world, solar hit that target three years early.
Learning from this experience, the Biden Administration is launching a series of “Earthshots” to drive down the costs of new technologies, marshalling the innovative capacity of researchers and companies.  And if we meet these Earthshots by 2030, we will turbocharge the clean energy revolution.
Already, inspiring innovations are emerging from research laboratories and garnering private investment to enter commercial markets. Breakthroughs in solid-state batteries could enable electric vehicle driving range to actually be longer than traditional gasoline cars, with lightning-quick recharging times.  The next generation of solar cells can produce more power from the sun at a fraction of the cost of today’s already inexpensive technology.
We’re on the march.  We’re headed in the right direction.  We just don’t know when we’re going to get where we need to.
Reaching global net-zero emissions represents the greatest market transformation – with the greatest economic promise – since the Industrial Revolution.
But the energy sector isn’t the only driver of global emissions.  Other areas are critical as well, such as halting illegal deforestation to manage emissions from land use.
More and more countries are emboldening their commitments to climate action – and they’re reaping the benefits for their people and their economies.
At the Summit in April in Washington, but globally virtually, Canada raised its 2030 target from 30 percent to fully 40-45 percent by 2030.  It is now working on its own roadmap for implementation.  Japan stepped up to pledge a reduction in its emissions by 46-50 percent.
These powerful announcements built on the impressive pledges from the European Union to slash emissions by 55 percent by 2030 and the United Kingdom to cut its emissions by 68 percent in the timeframe.
Here in the UK, you have demonstrated how to align economic value with climate action, with a ten-point green industrial plan for the future, from offshore wind to clean hydrogen to jet fuel and more.
And countries like Germany have also made important contributions to bend the global cost curve of solar power and deploy renewables on a large scale.
What does all that add up to?  Before and during the April Summit, countries representing 55 percent of global GDP announced 2030 commitments consistent with the global pace required to keep 1.5 degrees within reach.
And momentum continues to build worldwide as we meet with various countries.
South Korea and South Africa are both on track to strengthen their own climate targets ahead of Glasgow.
Some of the world’s leading producers of oil and gas are already showing signs they’re ready to move too.
Russia just agreed with us on the importance of robust implementation of Paris’ temperature goals and the global pursuit of net zero emissions, which they’ve never embraced yet.  After my visit to Moscow last week, we announced a joint commitment to make “significant efforts in this decade” to limit global warming.
Saudi Arabia likewise joined us in affirming the importance, “the importance of reducing emissions and taking adaptation actions during the 2020s to avoid the worst consequences of climate change.”
And in a landmark regional dialogue of ten Middle East and North African countries in the United Arab Emirates – including multiple oil producers – countries unanimously agreed to “reducing emissions by 2030.”
Now yes, these are only words – and we’re clear-eyed about that. But they’re the start – they’re encouraging words.  And in the next 100 days we can build on that.
The conversation is shifting from half measures to what it actually takes to get the job done.
For example, major players are mobilizing to “tap the brakes,” to cutting methane, a short-lived but potent greenhouse gas many times more destructive than carbon dioxide.
But here is the challenge: despite 55 percent of the world climbing on board for a 1.5 degree future, include many of the countries I just mentioned, despite that, there is still so much more that needs to be done.
Mother Nature does not pick and choose which country’s emissions are warming the planet.  Before she engulfs us in droughts or fires or floods, Mother Nature doesn’t differentiate between greenhouse gases from Europe or from the U.S. or from China.  Mother Nature only feels the impact and tracks emissions into the atmosphere writ large.  And what matters to our collective fate is the total of all those gases and the emissions track we are on together.
That brings us inexorably to the world’s relationship with China.
To those who say we should avoid engaging with China on climate change because of our differences, I say there is simply no way – mathematical or ideological – to solve the climate crisis without the full cooperation and leadership of a country that today leads the world with 28% of global emissions.  The International Energy Agency has laid out the reductions that are needed at a global scale, and their statistics imply that if China sticks with its current plan and does not peak its emissions until 2030, then the entire rest of the world would have to go to zero – zero! – by 2040 or even 2035.  It knocks at least a decade off the timeline for the rest of the world to decarbonize.  And that, my friends, sets a goal that currently is impossible to achieve.  So, it’s imperative that we – the United States, the second biggest emitter – and China – and the rest of the world – are all pulling together in the same direction in this critical effort.
In a remarkably short time, China has produced unprecedented economic growth.  But a foundational building block of that growth has been a staggering amount of fossil fuel use.  And as a large country, an economic leader, and now the largest driver of climate change, China absolutely can help lead the world to success by peaking and starting to reduce emissions early during this critical decade of 2020 to 2030.  And I say that simply because it is factual scientifically.  The truth is there’s no alternative because without sufficient reduction by China – together with the rest of us – the goal of 1.5 degrees is essentially impossible.  China’s partnership and leadership on this issue of extraordinary international consequence is essential.
Even as China continues to build and fund coal-fired power plants at a troubling pace, it is important to note that China has generally exceeded its international climate commitments in what it does at home.
As it builds out the details of their 14th five-year plan, experts all around the world are convinced that they can find greater opportunities to accelerate reductions in emissions without losing or slowing down their economy and without being asked to do something that’s unfair.  I am convinced they can overperform with higher commitments to renewable energy to displace a great deal of coal.
More attention could be paid to methane emissions, a faster transition to electric vehicles, stronger building codes, industrial processes offer huge possibilities to show leadership in building clean energy economies.
President Xi announced to the UN last year that China would “scale up” its NDC and we hope that will include sector-specific, near-term actions in their 14th five-year plan enabling earlier peaking and the possibility of rapid reductions afterwards.
Now obviously, it is not a mystery that China and the U.S. have many differences.  But on climate, cooperation –it is the only way to break free from the world’s current mutual suicide pact.
President Biden and President Xi have both stated unequivocally that each will cooperate on climate despite other consequential differences.  America needs China to succeed in slashing emissions, and China needs America to do its part and do the same.  The best opportunity that we have to secure a reasonable climate future is for China and the United States to work together.  The best way to do so is to lay out specific, ambitious, near-term reduction goals, and back them up with serious policy and work together to set an example to the world of where we need to go and how we can get there.
India, the world’s 3rd largest emitting nation, has set an impressive target of building 450 gigawatts of renewable energy by 2030.  That target is really critical to the world’s quest to hold 1.5 degrees, because without a rapid clean energy transition, India’s emissions will surpass the United States by 2040.
That’s why in a meeting with Prime Minister Modi we were able to agree on a new partnership with India – the U.S.-India Agenda 2030 Partnership, which President Biden and Prime Minister Modi launched at the Summit. And it will take specific actions to deploy that renewable energy.  We’re working to mobilize billions of new cash – fresh investment in India’s burgeoning clean energy.
Still, some argue that India did not create today’s predicament, therefore why should it have to share in the solution?  Well I just explained that the process doesn’t allow for individualization of where the emissions come from.  But more importantly, the solutions to climate change are the greatest economic opportunity we’ve seen on this planet since the industrial revolution.  And the fact is the consequences of the climate crisis will not be reserved for those countries most responsible for the problem. That’s just the reality.
So we simply cannot keep 1.5 degrees within reach without every one of the world’s major economies acting – without bringing the remaining 45 percent onboard into the task.
We also need to heed the needs and aspirations of all those who are particularly vulnerable nations.  This process must be fair, and it cannot just the developed world that has the ability to respond.  The fact is that 20 economies equal about 75-80 percent of all the emissions.  So some countries are right when they point the finger and say “wait a minute, we’re suffering the impacts but we didn’t create this.”  It’s a fundamental matter of equity and fairness that we respond to those for whom the climate crisis is imminently existential.  To that end President Biden has pledged to triple our support for adaptation efforts by 2024.  And we are working with our partners to further strengthen our collective support for the Paris finance agreements and commitments by the time we reach Glasgow.
To the world’s emerging economies, for whom development is justly your foremost priority, let me just say we will help you chart your own pathways to prosperity.  Pathways not on the polluting practices of the past, but on the clean, sustainable technologies of the future.
And to the major economies – let us be frank: the onus is on us.  We are the largest emitters of the past, and the largest emitters today, we play the largest role in pulling the world back from the brink of climate disaster.
And we all have further to go.
But we can do so knowing that it comes with opportunity.  That’s what the private sector is telling us today – increasingly moving to sustainable investment.
They are committing trillions of dollars now to make climate change central to investment strategy.
Meanwhile, in spite of the havoc wreaked by COVID-19, the world did see the unprecedented growth in renewable energy that we were able to produce in 2020.
So think about it my friends, the highest valued automobile company in the world – Tesla.  It only makes electric vehicles.
Mitsubishi is building the world’s largest zero emission steel plant – in Austria.
They know climate action is a golden opportunity.  And all the world can share in it.
But it won’t happen on its own.  It’s not automatic.  It’s not preordained.
250 companies, for instance, account for a third of global emissions – and yet 41 of them haven’t set goals for reducing emissions.
So we must match, we have to match policy to potential. In two days we meet at the Ministerial level to prepare for the G20 in October.  We will meet in Italy, the co-presidency of the COP.  Success at this week’s gathering of the world’s biggest emitters can help smooth the road for success when all the world gathers together in Glasgow this November.
So the world will be watching what they do.
We need the G20 to lead, in word and deed, so that all the world can lead in Glasgow.
My friends, there is still time to put a safer 1.5 degree Centigrade future back within reach.
But only if every major economy commits to meaningful reductions by 2030, that is the only way to put the world on a credible track to global net zero by midcentury.
At or before COP26, we need to see the major economies of the world – not just be ambitious or set ambitious targets, but we got to have clear plans for how we’re going to get there over the next decade.  By 2023, we need those same economies to put out road maps for how they’re going to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
Commitments have to be backed up by concrete national action plans.  The time for talking has long since past.  We need to match suitable investment – both from public and private sector – we need to really rethink the multi-developmental banks process – how we de-risk, how we allocate capital, and how we will grow our ways out of this.
We can – and must – achieve this together, especially knowing the triumph or tragedy of the two alternative worlds that await our choices.  I believe we will get to the low carbon economy we urgently need, but it is not clear to me yet that we will get there in time.
It’s what we’ve always done when we know that the world needs it most.  We can come together.
But it’s up to us to prove to ourselves and to the generation protesting in the streets – that we are prepared to do it again.  That we are the problem-solvers, not just dreamers, not talkers; we’re the doers, not the deniers.
That our words about ambition will be matched by ambitious actions.
My friends, Glasgow is the place, and 2021 is the time.  And we can in a little more than a hundred days, save the next hundred years. Thank you.