英语家园

 找回密码
 注册

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

搜索

可持续住房:人类未来住房模式的一个愿景

发布者: 五毒 | 发布时间: 2022-10-3 21:30| 查看数: 42| 评论数: 0|



So, I was born in India.

我出生在印度。

This is just a small part of my big, beautiful family there.

这只是我那庞大又美丽的家族的一小部分。

I have, actually, 50, five zero, first cousins.

我实际上有50个堂表兄弟姐妹。

Most of us have a couple of kids.

我们大多数人都有很多小孩。

And so all of this leads me to believe the United Nations when they tell us that by 2100,

所以,这一切都让我相信联合国告诉我们的:到2100年,

the world will have a population of almost 11 billion people.

全世界人口将会达到近110亿。

That is, three billion more people than the planet houses today.

比现今这个星球容纳的人口还要多30亿。

To house all of those people, we need to build about 2.4 trillion square feet of new built space.

为了容纳这些人口,我们需要再建造2.4万亿平方英尺的空间。

Now to give you a sense of scale, that is the equivalent of adding to the planet a New York City, every month...

好,为了让你们对这个规模有一些概念,这大概相当于每个月替这颗星球增盖一个纽约市,

for the next 40 years.

并且持续40年。

Now I'm a New Yorker and an architect.

我是一个纽约客,一个建筑师。

But this scares even me.

但这也让我吓着了。

But this is not a scary talk, I promise you.

但我保证,这并不是个可怕的演讲。

I think I know what you're probably thinking, which is: We are already experiencing severe impacts from climate change.

我知道你大概在想什么:我们正在经历气候变化所带来的严重后果。

How can the world house another three billion people?

这个世界怎么能再容纳30亿人?

And how can their housing needs be part of the solution, rather than part of the problem?

而他们的住屋需求怎么会是解决办法的一部分,而不是问题的一部分?

Could new housing be carbon-negative?

新式房屋能不能是负碳的?

Meaning that it offsets or sequesters more carbon than it produces.

意思是它抵消或隔离的碳比它所制造的多。

Now, for our big, existing cities, there is a lot of hope in clean energy grids fueled by renewables like solar, wind, nuclear and geothermal.

好,就我们现存的大都市而言,我们对清洁的输电网路抱有很大期望,由太阳能、风能、核能和地热等可再生资源发电。

But the fact is, we are still a ways away from getting fully clean power grids in our existing cities,

但事实是,我们离在我们现存的城市完全让输电网使用清洁能源还有一段距离,

where most of this population growth is going to occur.

而大多数人口增长会发生在这些城市里。

And that's true because of the problems with everything from transmission lines to the politics of nuclear energy.

原因是有运输线路和核能政策之类的问题。

So, clean grids are a really important part of the solution.

所以清洁能源是解决办法中非常重要的一部分。

But they don't help us that much, right at this moment.

但此刻,它能提供给我们的帮助并不多。

What we can do today, what we have existing technology for, is to build net-zero single-family homes.

我们现在可以做的是用我们现有的科技来建造碳中和的独立式房屋。

In sunny climates in particular, solar panels work very, very well.

尤其是在晴朗的天气,太阳能板会运作地非常好。

Because it's a lot of roof area, relative to very few occupants.

因为相对于它容纳的少量人数,它占据了大面积的屋顶。

But these things, they're hardly a panacea.

但这些东西并不是个万灵丹,

In part because they're very expensive to build.

部分原因是他们的建造成本过高。

But more problematically, because they induce car-oriented sprawl.

但更大的问题在于,它们会引起以车为中心的杂乱拓展。

And I don't care if the cars are electric or autonomous.

我不管这些车是电动或自动。

Sprawl is sprawl.

拓展就是拓展。

And it leads to a loss of wetlands, a loss of forests, a loss of farms and a loss of community.

这会导致湿地的减少、森林的减少、农地、社区的减少。

So maybe you're thinking the right answer to house our coming building boom are towers.

所以或许你认为要容纳这即将到来的人口爆炸,大楼才是正确答案。

And look, I've actually been called Professor Skyscraper.

我曾经被叫做“摩天大楼教授”。

I love a great tower.

我爱巨大的楼。

But the reality is we are very far away from developing carbon-negative towers.

但现实是,我们距离建成碳中和的大楼还有很远的距离。

And the reason is, towers are energy-intensive to build and operate.

因为塔在建造及运转过程中需要大量能量。

They house a lot of people, which is great.

它们能容纳很多人,这是件很棒的事。

But they have very little roof area to effectively use solar, and similarly, like, wind turbines at the top.

但它们并没有足够的屋顶面积来有效地使用太阳能,类似于楼顶的涡轮发动机。

All of that stuff barely makes a dent.

这些东西几乎没有取得任何进展。

On top of that, most skyscrapers are built out of steel and concrete, which have a very high degree of embodied energy.

最重要的是,大部分的摩天楼是用钢和混凝土建造的,这些材料会产生极高的建筑材料自含能量。

Now, I hold out a lot of hope for a technology known as mass-timber construction.

目前,我对一种科技抱有很大的期望,它叫“大规模木材建筑”。

Which would allow us to build tall towers out of environmentally friendly and fire-retardant wood that's actually a carbon sink.

它让我们得以用环保且阻燃的木材建造高楼大厦,事实上,它将会成为一个碳汇。

But we are a ways away from widespread adoption of that technology.

但我们距离广泛应用这种科技还很遥远。

I also hold out hope for the idea that windows could harness solar power.

我也对另一种想法抱有期望,那就是用窗户来收集太阳能。

But the idea that we have effective and affordable solar glass in the near future, that's even more nascent than mass timber.

但这种让我们在不远的未来使用高效、价格合理的太阳能玻璃的想法,比起大规模木材还不太成熟。

So for towers to really be sustainable, we need those clean energy grids that we spoke about.

所以如果真的要让塔可持续,我们需要我们所讨论的那种清洁能源网。

But we don't have them available to us today.

但它们现在并不能为我们所用。

So we have a paradox.

所以我们有个悖论。

How do we house all of these people?

我们该如何容纳这些人。

How do we build urban carbon-negative housing in a means that's technologically attainable and broadly affordable, and do that today?

我们该如何建造负碳建筑,并使用一种技术上可行又总体价格公道的方式呢?而且要现在就能做?

Because I'm tired of talking about 2050.

因为我已经厌倦了谈论2050年。

I believe that the answer is hiding in plain sight, that there is what I call a Goldilocks scale that sits between the scale of housing and towers.

我相信答案就隐藏在众目睽睽之下,就是我称之为“金发姑娘”的规模,这个规模介于普通房屋和大楼之间。

Two- to three-story housing that should actually look very familiar to most of you.

二至三层楼的房屋,你们应该对这些很熟悉。

Because we built the most beloved parts of our cities with it.

因为城市中我们最爱的部分大多数就是这个形态。

The row houses of Boston, the hutong districts of Beijing, most of the fabric of Edinburgh.

波士顿的联排别墅,北京的胡同,爱丁堡大部分地区的结构。

What we now build in this scale are largely cheap suburban townhomes.

我们以这个规模建造的房子大多是廉价的郊区联排式房屋。

They're banal.

它们很普通,

They're not sustainable.

不可持续,

They're not walkable.

也不适合逛逛。

They're certainly not beautiful.

它们绝对说不上美丽。

But could they provide a hint of a framework for a human-scale way of solving this problem, that is great for both the climate and our societies.

但它们能提供以人类的尺度来解决这个问题的一部分框架,这对气候和我们的社会都有好处。

This Goldilocks framework hits the sweet spot between the number of people it can house,

这个“金发姑娘”框架正中它所能容纳的人数和我们所需的屋顶空间之间的黄金位置,

and the amount of roof area we need to provide them and their communities with power.

可以为人们和社区提供能量。

It can be built out of simple local materials, like wood or brick,

它可以由简单的、当地的材料例如木材和砖头,来建造,

both of which have relatively low embodied energy and could be built by local workers.

它们都只有相对较低的内含能量,而且可以由当地工人建造。

And the solar panels up above could be supplemented with state-of-the-art battery systems that level out solar supply and user demand.

而楼顶的太阳能板可以由最先进的电池系统辅助,平衡太阳能的供需。

Similarly, we can have electric, state-of-the-art air conditioning and heating systems.

我们也同样可以使用现有的先进电力空调和加热系统。

This exists today.

这种是存在的。

They can create thermal storage.

他们可以储热。

What that means is it can produce ice or hot water off-peak, for use on-peak.

意思是,它可以在非高峰时期制冰或热水,在高峰时期使用。

This housing could compost food scraps and solid waste, and turn it into usable soils or protein for animal feed.

这种房屋可以利用厨余和固体废物制造堆肥,并且将它转变为可用的土壤或动物饲料的蛋白质。

And I think, most importantly, this kind of housing could provide affordable, communal, equitable housing for communities in dire need of it.

而我想,最重要的是,这类型房屋能够提供可负担的、公共的、公平的住房,提供给急需这些的社区。

And I work with a lot of these communities.

我和这些社区深入合作,

And I know how much demand there is for this out there.

所以我知道这些需求有多大。

Speaking of communities, I want to emphasize that this is not a one-size-fits-all solution.

说到这些社区,我想强调,这并不是个一体通用的解决办法。

This is a framework.

这是一个框架。

It's a template.

这是一个模板。

We can work with communities to make this housing appealing, visually and socially, make it socially and racially mixed,

我们可以和社区合作,让这些房屋在外观和社会性上具有吸引力,让它变得社会性包容、种族性包容,

integrated into the lives of existing communities.

与现有社区的生活融为一体。

And when it's built into our cities, what it means is that it's dense enough to support mass transit, like light-rail, express busses, bikes.

当我们在城市里建造它的时候,它会密集到足以支持公共交通,比如轻轨、高速巴士、脚踏车。

There are networks that plug into jobs, schools, parks and other daily destinations in our cities.

这些交通网络可以串联工作、学校、公园和其他我们城市里的日常场所。

This housing is compact enough that it leaves room for lots of trees and ground cover.

这种住房的空间十分紧凑,能够给树和土壤留有很大的空间。

That means that we can lower stormwater impacts.

也就是说我们可以降低暴风雨水所带来的影响。

We can reduce the heat island effect.

我们可以降低热岛效应。

We can lower the demand for air conditioning.

我们可以降低对空调的需求。

And for every family that lives in an apartment like this, it's one less house destroying farms and forests.

每有一个住在这样公寓里的家庭,就会减少一个需要摧毁农庄和森林的房屋。

Our collaborating engineers at Thornton Tomasetti have assured us that this is the lowest-carbon-footprint-per-person means of habitation,

我们在宋腾添玛沙帝的合作工程师向我们保证,居民将会留下最少的人均碳足迹,

while also providing a sustainable use of land on our planet.

并且可持续利用我们星球的土地。

I want you to imagine with me that we deployed this Goldilocks framework in two places that I love dearly, New York and Calcutta.

和我一起想象,我们在我很喜欢的两个地方部署了金发姑娘框架:纽约和加尔各答。

Very different places, but they have these big, booming downtowns.

这两个地方非常不一样,但它们都有很大且繁荣发展的市中心。

But they also have these growing outskirts that experience a lot of sprawl.

它们也有快速增长的郊区,遭受了大量的无序拓展。

So they have sites like this that are near mass transit.

所以它们有像这样靠近大众运输的地区。

But imagine if, on these sites, instead of building sprawl, we built this Goldilocks framework.

但想像一下,如果在这些地点,不建造这些拓展建筑,而建造金发姑娘框架。

Now, that would manifest in two very, very different ways.

那成果将会以两个非常、非常不同的方式显现。

Different materials, different cultural expressions.

不同的材料,不同的文化表达方式。

But it would give us carbon-negative, transit-rich, joyous places for people to live and raise their families.

但它会给我们带来负碳、交通便利、欢乐的地方,让人们居住并养育他们的家人。

Now, you may be thinking: So this is his big idea?

现在,你或许正在想,“所以这就是他的宏伟计划?

Small-scale housing, solar panels above, light-rail below, known technologies throughout, all organized into these affordable green neighborhoods?

小规模住房,楼顶装有太阳能板,地底有轻轨,全屋配备现有科技,全部装进这个价廉绿色的社区?

Even if you believed me that this was carbon-negative, how many of our 11 billion people could this possibly house?

就算你相信这是负碳的,这怎么可能容纳110亿人?

It's such a modest model.

这是一个保守的模型。

Well, it turns out, if all of us lived at this scale, all 11 billion of us would use up a landmass equivalent to the size of France.

这个嘛,事实是,如果我们以这个规模生活,这110亿个人只会用完相当于一个法国的土地面积。

Now, I have a feeling that the French don't want us all invading their country.

我知道法国人并不希望我们入侵他们的国家。

But I make this point to make a larger point, which is, we can all live in this transit-rich, carbon-negative, affordable way,

但我讲这点是为了解释更重要的一点,就是我们都可以用一个交通发达、负碳、可负担得起的方式生活,

and leave the vast majority of the planet for nature, for agriculture, for clean oceans.

并且把这星球的大部分留给自然,留给农业,留给干净的海洋。

We can do this.

我们做得到。

We know that residential energy use is so voracious that this model offsets so much carbon,

我们知道家用能源的需求非常大量,所以这个模型可以抵消这么多碳。

it actually more than offsets all of the cars in the world.

事实上它可以抵消比全世界汽车更多的排放量。

The impact of this would be staggering.

这样的影响将会是令人震惊的。

So yes, we can go to 11, 11 billion people.

所以没错,我们可以容纳110,110亿人。

We don't need to fear our neighbors.

我们无需害怕邻居。

We don't have a lack of land or technology.

我们并不缺少土地或科技。

We just have a lack of vision.

我们只是缺乏远见。

Because the answers are hiding in plain sight.

因为答案就藏在我们眼前。

Thank you very much.

谢谢大家。


最新评论

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表