龔鵬程對(duì)話海外學(xué)者第七十九期：在后現(xiàn)代情境中，被技術(shù)統(tǒng)治的人類社會(huì)，只有強(qiáng)化交談、重建溝通倫理，才能獲得文化新生的力量。這不是誰(shuí)的理論，而是每個(gè)人都應(yīng)實(shí)踐的活動(dòng)。龔鵬程先生遊走世界，并曾主持過(guò)“世界漢學(xué)研究中心”。我們會(huì)陸續(xù)推出“龔鵬程對(duì)話海外學(xué)者”系列文章，請(qǐng)他對(duì)話一些學(xué)界有意義的靈魂。范圍不局限于漢學(xué)，會(huì)涉及多種學(xué)科。以期深山長(zhǎng)谷之水，四面而出。

馬克·Z·雅克布森教授（Professor MarkZ. Jacobson ）

美國(guó)斯坦福大學(xué)土木與環(huán)境工程系教授、大氣/能源項(xiàng)目主任

龔鵬程教授：您好。您的研究涉及空氣污染、全球變暖問(wèn)題以及針對(duì)它們的大規(guī)模清潔、可再生能源解決方案。您能介紹一下您用來(lái)解決這些問(wèn)題的科學(xué)方法嗎？

馬克·Z·雅克布森教授：龔教授，您好。為了研究空氣污染和全球變暖問(wèn)題，我使用了我在過(guò)去 30 年中建立的一個(gè)全球到本地尺度的 3D 計(jì)算機(jī)模型（global-through-local scale three-dimensional computer model），稱為 GATOR-GCMOM（氣體、氣溶膠、運(yùn)輸、輻射—一般循環(huán)、中尺度、和海洋模型）。該模型在道路尺度和全球尺度之間的任何尺度上來(lái)模擬空氣污染、天氣和氣候。它將地球拆分成一個(gè)水平地覆蓋地球表面的彼此相鄰的盒子網(wǎng)格，并且這些盒子的層數(shù)從地表垂直堆疊到天空中60公里。該模型模擬了相關(guān)的大氣過(guò)程，包括排放、大氣氣體化學(xué)、大氣粒子物理和化學(xué)、云的形成和演化、降水、風(fēng)、湍流、風(fēng)和湍流的氣體和粒子傳輸、溫度、壓力、通過(guò)大氣的輻射，海洋化學(xué)和運(yùn)輸、光合作用和呼吸作用、陸地植被覆蓋、土壤溫度和水分等。

為了研究可再生能源解決方案，我使用 GATOR-GCMOM 來(lái)預(yù)測(cè)隨時(shí)間變化的風(fēng)、太陽(yáng)能場(chǎng)以及建筑供暖和制冷需求。 然后將這些數(shù)據(jù)用作我構(gòu)建的另一個(gè)模型 LOADMATCH 的輸入。 該模型將隨時(shí)間變化的能源需求與隨時(shí)間變化的供應(yīng)、存儲(chǔ)和需求響應(yīng)相匹配。 隨時(shí)間變化的能源需求是另一個(gè)必須從當(dāng)前和預(yù)計(jì)的未來(lái)需求信息中得出的輸入。LOADMATCH 是一個(gè)“試錯(cuò)”模型。 它及時(shí)前進(jìn)，試圖平衡供需等。如果在任何時(shí)候都沒(méi)有平衡，則必須使用調(diào)整后的輸入重新啟動(dòng)模型。 這一直持續(xù)到獲得穩(wěn)定的解決方案，這通常會(huì)有 5 到 10 次嘗試。

這兩種模型都在許多論文中得到了廣泛的評(píng)估。

For studying air pollution and global warming problems, I use a global-through-local scale three-dimensional computer model that I built over the past 30 years, called GATOR-GCMOM (Gas, Aerosol, TranspOrt, Radiation-General Circulation, Mesoscale, and Ocean Model). This model simulates air pollution, weather, and climate on any scale between the road scale and the global scale. It breaks up the Earth into a grid of boxes adjacent to each other covering the surface of the Earth horizontally, and layers of such boxes stacked vertically from the surface to 60 kilometers in the sky. The model simulates relevant atmospheric processes, including emissions, atmospheric gas chemistry, atmospheric particle physics and chemistry, cloud formation and evolution, precipitation, winds, turbulence, gas and particle transport by the winds and turbulence, temperatures, pressures, radiation through the atmosphere, ocean chemistry and transport, photosynthesis and respiration, land vegetation cover, soil temperature and moisture, and more.

For studying renewable energy solutions, I use GATOR-GCMOM to predict time-dependent winds, solar fields, and building heating and cooling requirements. These data are then used as inputs into another model that I built, LOADMATCH. This model matches time-varying demand for energy with time-varying supply, storage, and demand-response. The time-varying demand for energy is another input that must be derived from current and projected future demand information. LOADMATCH is a “trial-and-error” model. It marches forward in time, trying to balance demand with supply, etc. If a balance does not occur at any point, the model must be re-started with adjusted inputs. This continues until a stable solution is obtained, which usually occurs after 5 to 10 attempts.

Both models have been evaluated extensively in numerous papers.

龔鵬程教授：公眾普遍認(rèn)為，核電是世界大型經(jīng)濟(jì)體脫碳所必需的。 但是您正確地強(qiáng)調(diào)了核電的高風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。 核電是脫碳的解決方案嗎？

馬克·Z·雅克布森教授：鑒于我們需要在 8 年內(nèi)解決 80% 的氣候問(wèn)題， 2035 年到 2050 年解決 100%的氣候問(wèn)題，我們需要專注于可以低成本快速部署且不會(huì)造成能源安全問(wèn)題的解決方案。不幸的是，新核電并不是這些解決方案之一。

事實(shí)上，歷史上建造的每座核電站從規(guī)劃到運(yùn)營(yíng)都需要 10 到 20 年的時(shí)間，這比我們解決 80% 的氣候問(wèn)題所需的時(shí)間要長(zhǎng)得多。今天在自由化市場(chǎng)上建造的大多數(shù)反應(yīng)堆都需要 16 到 20 年的時(shí)間。新核電的單位能源成本也是新的陸上風(fēng)能或公用事業(yè)規(guī)模太陽(yáng)能光伏發(fā)電的 5-7 倍，從規(guī)劃到運(yùn)營(yíng)需要 1-3 年。因此，新核能需要 13-19 年的時(shí)間，成本是新風(fēng)能或太陽(yáng)能的 5-7 倍。

此外，核能存在風(fēng)能和太陽(yáng)能所沒(méi)有的能源安全問(wèn)題。這些問(wèn)題包括武器擴(kuò)散、熔毀、放射性廢物儲(chǔ)存和地下鈾礦開(kāi)采肺癌等問(wèn)題。例如，至少有五個(gè)國(guó)家以民用核能或試驗(yàn)反應(yīng)堆計(jì)劃為幌子研制了核武器。曾經(jīng)建造的所有核反應(yīng)堆中有 1.5% 已經(jīng)在一定程度上熔化。放射性廢物必須儲(chǔ)存數(shù)十萬(wàn)年。地下鈾礦開(kāi)采與暴露于氡子體導(dǎo)致的肺癌增加相關(guān)。

即使是新一代小型模塊化反應(yīng)堆（SMR）也是一個(gè)問(wèn)題。它們要到 2030 年左右或更晚才能使用，預(yù)計(jì)成本將與現(xiàn)有反應(yīng)堆相同或更多，產(chǎn)生比當(dāng)前反應(yīng)堆更多的放射性廢物（包括反應(yīng)堆中使用的材料的放射性），增加武器擴(kuò)散風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，不會(huì)改變鈾礦開(kāi)采風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，并造成不確定的熔毀風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。

Given that we need to solve 80% of the climate problem within eight years and 100% by 2035 to 2050, we need to focus on solutions that can be deployed rapidly at low cost and that do not cause energy security problems. Unfortunately, new nuclear power is not one of these solutions. Virtually every nuclear plant built in history has taken between 10-20 years between planning and operation, which is much longer than we have to solve 80% of the climate problem. Most all reactors being built in liberalized markets today are taking between 16-20 years. New nuclear power also costs 5-7 times per unit energy that of new onshore wind or utility scale solar photovoltaics, which take anywhere from 1-3 years between planning and operation today. So new nuclear takes 13-19 years longer at 5-7 times the cost as new wind or solar.

In addition, nuclear has energy security issues that wind and solar do not. Such issues include weapons proliferation, meltdown, radioactive waste storage, and underground uranium mining lung cancer issues, among others. For example, at least five countries have developed nuclear weapons under the guise of civilian nuclear energy or test reactor programs. One and one-half percent of all nuclear reactors ever build have melted down to some degree. Radioactive waste must be stored for hundreds of thousands of years. Underground uranium mining is associated with enhanced lung cancer from exposure to radon progeny.

Even new-generation small-modular reactors (SMR) are a problem. They will not be available until around 2030 or later and are expected to cost just as much or more, produce more radioactive waste (including radioactivity of materials used in the reactor) than current reactors, increase weapons proliferation risk, not change uranium mining risk, and cause uncertain meltdown risk.

龔鵬程教授：我們面臨的下一個(gè)問(wèn)題是關(guān)于科學(xué)家對(duì)風(fēng)的可擴(kuò)展性和太陽(yáng)能。 盡管在公共話語(yǔ)中，風(fēng)能和太陽(yáng)能經(jīng)常因缺乏穩(wěn)定性和在土地上的所占面積而受到批評(píng)，但您的研究表明情況并非如此。不幸的是，除非一個(gè)人是氣候科學(xué)專家，否則很難理解科學(xué)家們達(dá)成的共識(shí)以及仍在辯論的內(nèi)容。 因此我的問(wèn)題是：關(guān)于可再生能源，氣候科學(xué)家在哪些方面達(dá)成了廣泛共識(shí)，哪些方面仍存在激烈爭(zhēng)論？

馬克·Z·雅克布森教授：早在 2009 年，當(dāng)我們?yōu)槭澜缰贫ǖ谝粋€(gè) 100% 可再生能源計(jì)劃時(shí)，公用事業(yè)和能源研究人員認(rèn)為，如果電網(wǎng)中的可再生能源超過(guò) 20%，就不可能保持電網(wǎng)穩(wěn)定。經(jīng)過(guò)多年的額外研究和可再生能源在許多地方的高滲透率示例，討論已經(jīng)發(fā)生了變化。今天的問(wèn)題只是擁有 100% 可再生電網(wǎng)與 80% 或 90% 可再生電網(wǎng)相比，成本是否更高。因此，出現(xiàn)了很多趨同。趨同的一個(gè)重要原因是電池、其他類型的電力存儲(chǔ)以及風(fēng)能和太陽(yáng)能發(fā)電的效率提高和成本降低。此外，需求響應(yīng)等網(wǎng)格管理工具也變得越來(lái)越普遍。

科學(xué)家們也普遍認(rèn)為風(fēng)能和太陽(yáng)能將成為主要的可再生能源。大多數(shù)人都同意熱泵、電動(dòng)汽車、電磁爐和能源效率是未來(lái)的關(guān)鍵。大多數(shù)人進(jìn)一步同意輸電網(wǎng)需要擴(kuò)大，我們需要大量的海上風(fēng)電。最后，大多數(shù)人同意我們需要使大部分能源電氣化。

越來(lái)越多的科學(xué)家也同意，我們需要專注于范圍更窄的技術(shù)。然而，一些科學(xué)家堅(jiān)持使用不太有用或?qū)嶋H上有害的技術(shù)，例如碳捕獲、直接空氣捕獲、生物能源和/或核能。因此，今天的主要分歧點(diǎn)，是我們是否應(yīng)該奉行“所有技術(shù)”的政策，其中考慮到每一種技術(shù)，即使是那些增加空氣污染或能源不安全的技術(shù)，還是“風(fēng)-水-太陽(yáng)能（wind-water-solar）” (WWS)”政策，其中我們專注于清潔和可再生能源（從而消除導(dǎo)致空氣污染和全球變暖的化學(xué)物質(zhì)）并且不存在能源不安全問(wèn)題。

Back in 2009, when we produced our first 100% renewable energy plan for the world, utilities and energy researchers believed it was not possible to keep the grid stable with more than 20% renewables on the grid. After years of additional studies and examples of renewables in high penetrations in many locations, the discussion has shifted. Today the question is only whether it costs more to have a 100% renewable grid versus an 80% or 90% renewable grid. Thus, a lot of convergence has occurred. A big reason for the convergence is the improved efficiency and lower cost of batteries, other types of electricity storage, and wind and solar electricity generation. In addition, grid management tools, such as demand response, have become more commonplace.

Scientists are also in large agreement that wind and solar will be the major renewable energy sources. Most all agree that heat pumps, electric vehicles, induction cooktops, and energy efficiency are keys to the future. Most agree further that the transmission grid needs to be expanded and that we need a lot of offshore wind. Finally, most agree that we need to electrify most energy.

More and more, scientists are also agreeing that we need to focus on a narrower set of technologies. However, some scientists are holding out to use technologies that are not so useful or are actually harmful, such as carbon capture, direct air capture, bioenergy, and/or nuclear power. Thus, the main point of disagreement today is whether we should pursue an “all-of-the-above” policy, in which every technology is considered, even those that increase air pollution or energy insecurity, or a “wind-water-solar (WWS)” policy, in which we focus on energy sources that are both clean and renewable (thus eliminate chemicals that cause both air pollution and global warming) and do not have energy insecurity issues.

龔鵬程教授：最近，您為中國(guó)發(fā)布了應(yīng)對(duì)全球變暖、空氣污染和能源不安全的解決方案。 您的主要發(fā)現(xiàn)是什么？

馬克·Z·雅克布森教授：我們最近發(fā)表了一篇關(guān)于如何將 145 個(gè)國(guó)家轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)?100% 清潔、可再生能源和用于所有能源目的的存儲(chǔ)的論文：: https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/WWS-145-Countries.html

該文件包括一個(gè)針對(duì)中國(guó)的計(jì)劃，總結(jié)如下：https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/145Country/21-WWS-China.pdf

與其他國(guó)家一樣，中國(guó)的計(jì)劃要求所有能源部門（電力、交通、建筑、工業(yè)、農(nóng)業(yè)/林業(yè)/漁業(yè)和軍事）向 100% 風(fēng)-水-太陽(yáng)能 (WWS) 和存儲(chǔ)過(guò)渡.存儲(chǔ)的主要類型是電、熱、冷和氫存儲(chǔ)。該計(jì)劃還要求擴(kuò)大輸電并使用需求響應(yīng)管理來(lái)幫助保持電網(wǎng)穩(wěn)定。

該計(jì)劃對(duì)中國(guó)的主要結(jié)論是，每年將會(huì)挽救 110 萬(wàn)人免受空氣污染的影響，消除中國(guó)能源溫室氣體排放（包括每年 149 億噸二氧化碳），創(chuàng)造 900 萬(wàn)長(zhǎng)期、全職工作比失去的更多，并且只需要該國(guó) 0.57% 的土地用于新的公用太陽(yáng)能光伏和 CSP 工廠的足跡，以及 0.97% 的陸上風(fēng)力渦輪機(jī)之間的間距（這樣的間距區(qū)域可用于多種用途）。

資本成本約為 13 萬(wàn)億美元。但是，每年的能源成本將從每年 4.2 美元下降到 1.5 萬(wàn)億美元（下降 63%），或者僅在能源成本方面每年就可以節(jié)省 2.7 萬(wàn)億美元。這主要是由于 WWS 系統(tǒng)的能源需求減少了 53.4%。由此產(chǎn)生的能源成本回收時(shí)間僅為五年左右。

由于 WWS 額外節(jié)省了健康和氣候成本，能源的總社會(huì)成本（能源加上健康加上氣候成本）將從每年 23 美元下降到 1.5 萬(wàn)億美元（下降 93%），因此社會(huì)成本回收時(shí)間更短超過(guò)一年。

Yes, we recently published a paper on how to transition 145 countries to 100% clean, renewable energy and storage for all energy purposes:https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/WWS-145-Countries.html

The paper includes a plan for China, which is summarized here:

https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/145Country/21-WWS-China.pdf

The plan for China, like for other countries, calls for a transition across all energy sectors (electricity, transportation, buildings, industry, agriculture/forestry/fishing, and the military) to 100% wind-water-solar (WWS) and storage. The main types of storage are electricity, heat, cold, and hydrogen storage. The plan also calls for expanded transmission and to use demand response management to help keep the grid stable.

The main conclusions of the plan for China are that it would save 1.1 million lives from air pollution each year, eliminate China’s emissions of greenhouse gases from energy (including 14,900 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year), create nine million more long-term, full-time jobs than lost and require only 0.57% of the country’s land for the footprint of new utility solar PV and CSP plants and 0.97% for the spacing between onshore wind turbines (such spacing area can be used for multiple purposes). The capital cost would be ~$13 trillion. However, annual energy costs would decline from $4.2 to $1.5 trillion per year (by 63%), or a savings of $2.7 trillion per year in energy costs alone. This is due mostly to the 53.4% reduction in energy requirements with a WWS system. The resulting energy cost payback time is only about five years. Because of the additional health and climate cost savings due to WWS, the total social cost of energy (energy plus health plus climate costs) would decline from $23 to $1.5 trillion per year (by 93%), so the social cost payback time is less than one year.

龔鵬程，1956年生于臺(tái)北，臺(tái)灣師范大學(xué)博士，當(dāng)代著名學(xué)者和思想家。著作已出版一百五十多本。

辦有大學(xué)、出版社、雜志社、書院等，并規(guī)劃城市建設(shè)、主題園區(qū)等多處。講學(xué)于世界各地。并在北京、上海、杭州、臺(tái)北、巴黎、日本、澳門等地舉辦過(guò)書法展。現(xiàn)為中國(guó)孔子博物館名譽(yù)館長(zhǎng)、美國(guó)龔鵬程基金會(huì)主席。