正文翻译
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻译：jiangye111 转载请注明出处
Convert half of UK farmland to nature to fight the climate crisis and restore wildlife, urges top scientist
-New woodlands and wild places are needed to fight climate crisis and improve people’s health
顶级科学家呼吁，将英国一半的农田退耕还林，以应对气候危机，恢复野生动物数量
——应对气候危机和改善人们的健康需要新的林地和野生环境
(Converting the farmland would create new landscapes across a third of the country.)
（改造农田将在全国三分之一的地区创造新的地貌景观。）（译注：奔跑着欢快羚羊的英国大地……）
新闻：
Half of the nation’s farmland needs to be transformed into woodlands and natural habitat to fight the climate crisis and restore wildlife, according to a former chief scientific adviser to the UK government.
英国政府一位前首席科学顾问表示，需要将英国一半的农田改造成林地和自然栖息地，以应对气候危机，恢复野生动物。
Prof Sir Ian Boyd said such a change could mean the amount of cattle and sheep would fall by 90%, with farmers instead being paid for storing carbon dioxide, helping prevent floods and providing beautiful landscapes where people could boost their health and wellbeing.
伊恩·博伊德教授表示，这样的变化可能意味着牛羊的数量将减少90%，而农民将获得储存二氧化碳，从而帮助预防洪水，并提供人们可以在那里增进健康和福祉的美丽风景的补偿费用。
He said the 20% of food production lost by converting half of farmland could be made up by the development of vertical farms, where food is produced indoors in controlled and more efficient conditions. Boyd said: “I know there are big companies looking at how to really scale this up.”
他说，将一半的农田改造成农田所损失的20%的粮食产量可以通过发展立体农场来弥补，在立体农场中，粮食是在室内控制和更有效的条件下生产的。博伊德说：“我知道有一些大公司正在考虑如何真正扩大生产规模。”
A series of studies have concluded that people in rich nations need to eat much less meat to tackle the climate emergency and improve their health. “Most of the livestock production in the UK is unprofitable without public subsidy,” said Boyd. “The public are subsidising the production of livestock to produce huge environmental damages, all the way from greenhouse gas emissions to water pollution. Why should we continue to do that? It’s not sensible.
一系列研究得出结论，富裕国家的人们需要少吃肉来应对气候紧急情况，改善健康状况。博伊德说：“要是没有公共补贴，英国大部分的畜牧业都是无利可图的。从温室气体排放到水污染，政府一直在补贴牲畜的生产，造成了巨大的环境破坏。我们为什么要继续这样做呢？这不是明智的做法。”
“If anybody asked me: ‘If there is one thing I can do to help save the planet, what would it be?’ I would say just eat a lot less meat. It’s the easiest thing to do. I’ve done it.”
“如果有人问我：‘如果我能为拯救地球做一件事，我会做什么？’我想说的是少吃肉。这是最简单的方法。我照做了。”
People could reduce the meat they eat by 90% and have a perfectly balanced diet, Boyd said: “Freeing up 50% of the land would probably result in a reduction in the amount of livestock by about that amount, because it would be mostly livestock land we would be taking out of production.”
人们可以减少他们90%的吃肉量，并有一个完美平衡的饮食，博伊德说：“腾出50%的土地可能会导致牲畜数量大约相应量的减少，因为我们将要停止生产的大部分都是牲畜用地。”
Farmers should be paid for changing the way land is used, he said. Current subsidies are largely based on the amount of land owned, but the government has pledged it will “move to a system based on public money for public goods” after the UK leaves the EU’s subsidy regime.
他说，农民应该为改变土地使用方式而获得报酬。目前的补贴主要基于拥有的土地面积，但政府承诺，在英国退出欧盟补贴机制后，将“转向一个基于公共资金购买公共产品的体系”。
Boyd said: “This proposal is not about being negative about farmers. It’s about being positive about their futures and helping them to adapt and continue providing support for society, but in a different way from in the past.”
博伊德称：“这项提案并不是要否定农民。而是要对他们的未来持积极态度，帮助他们适应并继续为社会提供支持，只是方式与过去不同而已。”
评论翻译
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.com 翻译：jiangye111 转载请注明出处
[–]xjalw478949p
Great Britain is a small island. Years ago now our energy consumption was already 1.25 watts per metre squared available land. Our energy consumption will grow by at least 40% over the next 25 years.
You could make everything from the South coast to somewhere near Birmingham one big solar farm and we could be energy independent for a few decades at least, but I doubt ''''the electorate'''' would go for that.
In terms of attempting to pro-actively combat climate change reforestation is probably the only realistic option we have (based on the actual evidence so far, rather than the basic assessment that ''''yes, that should be possible from an engineering point of view'''', we should forget BECCS, but even if you don''''t forget BECCS, under best case scenarios elephant grass only yields half a watt per meter squared (and that is in the tropics, not Northern Europe) so how is the UK supposed to cover its energy needs and food production)?
At some point something has to give. It gives bit by bit, quality of life declines. People get used to their new reality. Zero hours contracts become acceptable. Choosing between heating and bathing becomes normal.
At the moment, and for the foreseeable future, our economic and political systems amount to little more than ''''get what you can and fuck the weak and the poor''''. Poor people voting against immigration in the UK is simple self preservation. I wish it wasn''''t the case, but these are emergent properties of the political liberalism we have (now little more than barely disguised economic liberalism). The race to the bottom is on. Full speed ahead! We are riding this sort straight off the nearest cliff!
The alternative is to change our political and economic systems. Does one care to try this (and I am talking about nothing violent or anything, just simple activism, changing the system from within)? Or does one say ''''fuck it, we are going to evolve through crisis. Most of the humans in positions of wealth or power are simply not good enough, and they are protected by police and military personnel who, batons raised, pepper spray at the ready are certainly not good enough - at least in this context - so we will get what we deserve''''.
英国是一个小岛。几年前，我们的能源消耗已经是每平方米1.25瓦特。我们的能源消耗在未来25年将至少增长40%。
你可以把从南部海岸到伯明翰附近的任何地方都建成一个大型太阳能发电厂，我们至少可以在几十年内实现能源独立，但我怀疑“选民们”是否会为此努力。
就积极主动地应对气候变化而言，重新造林可能是我们唯一现实的选择（根据到目前为止的实际证据，而不是基于“是的，从工程的角度来看，这应该是可能的”这一基本评估，我们应该忘记生物能碳捕捉与封存技术，但即使你不忘记该技术，在最好的情况下，象草每平方米只能产生半瓦功率（而且这还是在热带地区，而不是北欧）），因此，英国应该如何满足其能源需求和粮食生产呢？
在某种程度上，有些东西必须放弃。一点一点地放弃，生活质量下降。人们习惯了新的现实。零时工合同变得可以接受。在取暖和洗澡之间二选一变得很正常。
在当前和可预见的未来，我们的经济和政治制度不过是“尽你所能去捞，去tmd弱者和穷人”。在英国，穷人投票反对移民就是简单的自我保护。我希望事实并非如此，但这些都是我们所拥有的政治自由主义（如今只不过是几乎不加掩饰的经济自由主义）的突现特征。逐底竞争已经开始了。全速前进！我们正从最近的悬崖上直冲下去！
另一种选择是改变我们的政治和经济体制。有人愿意尝试一下吗（我说的不是暴力或其他什么，只是简单的激进主义，从内部改变体制）？或者有人会说，“去tmd，我们将在危机中发展。大多数拥有财富或权力的人根本不够好，他们受到警察和军事人员的保护，他们举起警棍，准备好胡椒喷雾，当然不够好——至少在这种情况下——所以我们会争取我们应得的”。
[–]justalongbowguy
The decline is already evident. In the UK, the life expectancy has already dropped, and the US isn’t faring well either. We have already peaked, and it seems it’s only downhill from here.
下降已经很明显了。在英国，预期寿命已经下降，美国的情况也不太好。我们已经触顶了，似乎只会继续下滑。
[–]Dixnorkel
Great Britain is a small island now, but was only a small part of Doggerland.
英国现在是一个小岛，但以前只是“多格兰”的一小部分（译注：北海深处发现的类似亚特兰蒂斯的遗址。“多格兰”是一个巨大的陆地的名字，它在至少8500年前被淹没在海洋中。它证明了现在英国的岛屿曾经与欧洲其他地区相连。）。
[–]xjalw478949p
Wait, are you a Doggerland separatist or something?
等下，你是多格兰分离主义者或其他什么人吗？
[–]hopeitwillgetbetter
Well, if climate change keeps throwing extreme weather curved balls all over the place, more farmers will have no choice but to give up on farming. Which means the land will be left alone regardless.
Even industrial farming already has trouble making a profit. The Biggest Little Farm documentary for example is about a sustainable farm which spent a lot of money and like 7 years to repair very badly degraded soil.
The Sustainability doc also featured a farm with soil so abused that the sustainable type farmer who bought it was thought a fool. They managed to heal the soil.
I suppose a silver lining is that farming will get more and more difficult-expensive that finally the only option are sustainable methods.
好吧，如果气候变化继续把极端天气的曲线球扔得到处都是，更多的农民将别无选择，只能放弃耕作。这意味着不管怎样，这片土地都将被遗弃。
即使是工业化的农业也很难盈利。例如，《最大的小农场》纪录片是讲一个可持续的农场的，它花了很多钱，花了7年的时间来修复严重退化的土壤。
《可持续发展宣言》还特别提到了一个农场，它的土壤被滥用，购买它的可持续发展型农民设法使土壤复原，却被认为是傻瓜。
我想，令人欣慰的是，农业将变得越来越困难，最终唯一的选择只能是可持续的耕作方法。
[–]merikariuReciprocal Destruction
If you have visited certain parts of Scotland, you would have seen how destructive an animal the common sheep is. It strips the landscape of anything except turf.
In West Texas, the cattle destroyed the first layer of biomass, then the sheep were brought in and reduced areas to desert and scrubland.
如果你去过苏格兰的某些地方，你就会看到普通绵羊这种动物的破坏性有多大了。除了草皮之外，它把任何东西都啃光了。
在西德克萨斯，牛破坏了第一层的生物量，然后羊来了，把该地区啃成了不毛之地。
[–]call-me-ischmael
That’s why they need wolves to act as shepherds. Wolves move sheep away from places they shouldn’t be, like open pastures.
Wolves are awesome. All this, According to this mind blowing gorgeous documentary https://youtu.be/ysa5OBhXz-Q
这就是为什么他们需要狼来扮演牧羊人的角色。狼把羊群从不该去的地方转移出去，比如开阔的牧场。
狼太棒了。这一切，都能在这部震撼人心的纪录片里看到：
https://youtu.be/ysa5OBhXz-Q
[–]merikariuReciprocal Destruction
Also, wilderness is view by our culture as something like a virgin that everyone eagerly wants to rape. Its animals are viewed as a nuisance such as foxes and racoons. Its timber begs to be removed.
同样，在我们的文化中，荒野就像处女，人人都渴望强jian她。她上面的动物则被视为讨厌鬼，比如如狐狸和浣熊。她的木材请求被移走。
[–]dunderpatron
Not to mention, be utterly defaced by a solar power plant.
更不用说被太阳能发电厂彻底破坏了。
[–]hopeitwillgetbetter
To keep ruminants from doing too much damage, they gotta be moved along by predators. If we want cattle raising to be sustainable, it has to mimic nature more.
为了防止反刍动物造成太大的伤害，它们必须被捕食者驱赶。如果我们想让养牛变得可持续，就必须更多地模仿自然（行为）。
[–]antidamage
This is such utter rubbish.
The major cause of climate change is CO2 emissions. The major panacea for that is ocean algae (like it has ALWAYS been) and the risk is that the oceans are heating up and there''''ll be a period where most of the algae dies and new variants take their place.
The number of trees we have means nothing. The number of trees we burn means nothing. It''''s all about how much coal and oil we use, and it''''s all about how much CO2 we put out. It''''s never been about intentionally re-sequestering it. What trees can provide is a meaningless, infinitesimally small fraction of what we need to do.
这真是一派胡言。
气候变化的主要原因是二氧化碳排放。解决这一问题的主要灵丹妙药是海洋藻类（就像一直以来那样），而风险在于海洋正在升温，将会有一段时间大部分藻类死亡，取而代之的是新的变种。
我们拥有的树的数量没有任何意义。我们燃烧的树木的数量没有任何意义。关键在于我们用了多少煤和石油，关键在于我们排放了多少二氧化碳。从来都不是故意重新隔离它。树所能提供的只是我们所需要做的事情的一个毫无意义的、无穷小的一部分。
[–]sherpa17
It''''s an honest question. It''''s hard to believe that you have trouble answering it and are instead poking fun at my intelligence. I will reply like a complete cunt, which seems to be a language you understand. You do realize that there are units of measurement called calories, right? And when you remove one sort of food calorie (meat, let''''s say) you will have to replace all or part of it with another source (veggies, let''''s say)...with me so far or already lost again?
Replacing meat calories with veggie calories seems like a great idea on the surface. It''''s partially true, if the meat being sourced is the CAFO, grain-fed sort. But it does nothing to store carbon. Food waste becomes a larger issue and, most importantly, mob-grazed land with deep, rich soils built like many of the world''''s great soils (cattle of one variety or another) disappear completely.
I''''m finished speaking with you. I really want to believe you aren''''t a douche but it''''s a conceit you can''''t rely on anymore.
这是一个诚实的问题。很难相信你在回答这个问题上有困难，反而在取笑我的智商。我将像一个十足的贱人一样回答——这似乎才是一种你能理解的语言。你知道有一种测量单位叫做卡路里，对吧？当你减少了一种食物的卡路里摄入（比如肉类），你就必须用另一种食物（比如蔬菜）来全部或部分替代它……到目前为止思维有没有跟上我？还是已经掉队了？
从表面上看，用蔬菜卡路里代替肉类卡路里似乎是个好主意。如果肉的来源是围栏畜牧业，谷物喂养的那些种类，那么有一部分是正确的。但是它不能储存碳。食物浪费变成了一个更大的问题，最重要的是，像世界上许多大的土壤一样，被大量放牧过的（各种各样的牲畜）被水覆盖的土地和深厚肥沃的土壤会完全消失。
我和你说完了。我真地很想相信你不是一个笨蛋，但这是一个你不能再相信的幻想。
[–]BENJ4x
What''''s that actually going to do in the grand scheme of things though? The UK is tiny compared to other countries and I don''''t see how just straight up converting half of all farmland is going to make much of a dent.
It''''s probably just the article being outrageous or just taking one part the scientist said out of context to get clicks really.
但从大局来看，这到底有什么用呢？与其他国家相比，英国的面积很小，我看不出仅仅将一半的农田改作耕地会有多大影响。
可能只是这篇文章太离谱了，或者只是断章取义地拿了科学家说的一部分内容来获取点击量吧。
[–]robespierrem
most of the UK is green like next to nothing is urban or built up, would be better if it was wild but there are no wild animals to give land to in the UK.
英国大部分地区是绿色的，几乎没有什么是城市或建筑，如果是野生的会更好，但是在英国没有野生动物可以在土地上奔跑啊。
[–]thedignityofstruggle
Vertical farmng is a tech joke.
立体农场就是个科技笑话。
[–]liizard
Why''''s it a tech joke?
为什么这是个科技笑话？
[–]RestlesslyWandering
it definitely isn''''t any kind of joke, it is a very useful tool for growing crops in confined spaces such as inner cities
这绝对不是什么笑话，它是一种非常有用的工具，可以在狭窄的空间里种植作物，比如在市中心
[–]sinkmyteethin
That''''s 100% incorrect. You can''''t grow any crops, only greens and salads and shit. Useless veggies, not staple foods
100%错误。你不能种庄稼，只能种蔬菜、沙拉和其他垃圾。没用的蔬菜，种不了主食
[–]-big_booty_bitches-
Sounds like a real good way to make themselves needlessly dependent on food imports. Why is the solution to climate change always white countries fucking themselves over one way or another?
听起来真是个让他们不必要地依赖食品进口的好办法。为什么解决气候变化的办法总是让白人国家以这样或那样的方式操他们自己呢？
閱讀更多 龍騰網看世界 的文章
