如何評判你的城市環境是否環保
Some cities consume energy with admirable efficiency. Others are more profligate. Gauging which is which involves more than just reading a meter. And it depends who’s doing the judging.
一些城市的能源利用效率讓人欽佩，而另一些城市卻揮霍無度。評估一個城市的能源利用情況，不是看一個讀數那麼簡單。而且還取決於是誰在做評判。
Various lists of winners and sinners tend to contain the same names. The usual winners include wealthy, white-collar American cities, such as San Francisco and Seattle, and Nordic ones like Copenhagen and Oslo.
在各類環保城市和污染城市的排名中，有的城市在兩邊都有出現。通常的環保城市包括富裕的白領美國城市，比如舊金山和西雅圖，以及哥本哈根、奧斯陸這樣的北歐城市。
The two European capitals held prominent positions within the region on the Siemens Green City index, a compilation of cities lauded for using innovative methods to minimize their impact on the environment. Singapore and, perhaps surprisingly, the Brazilian city of Curitiba were the leaders for Asia and Latin America.
這兩個歐洲首都在西門子綠色城市指數(Siemens Green City index)中名列前茅。該指數表揚一批通過創新方法儘可能減少對環境影響的城市。新加坡是亞洲的領先城市，可能讓人吃驚的是，巴西的庫裏奇巴是拉丁美洲的領先城市。
San Francisco and Seattle, along with New York and Los Angeles, ranked among the top 10 in a 2008 Brookings Institution study of the 100 largest American cities with the lowest carbon emissions per resident. Seattle was the only one of these four cities that did not also finish in the top 10 in the latest annual ranking of energy efficiency compiled by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
布魯金斯學會(Brookings Institution)在2008年對美國100個大城市的人均碳排量進行了調查，結果舊金山、西雅圖、紐約和洛杉磯進入了人均碳排量最低的前十名。其中，只有西雅圖未能進入美國環保署(United States Environmental Protection Agency)最新的能源效率年度排名前十。
Some of these cities deserve their praise, such as Copenhagen, with its offshore wind turbines and ubiquitous bicycles, and Curitiba, which has implemented conservation and sustainability programs since the 1970s in a part of the world where environmental concerns often get short shrift in the quest to lift economic growth. Other cities are often beneficiaries of accidents of geography or history.
這些城市中確實有值得讚揚的，比如哥本哈根的離岸風力渦輪機和無處不在的自行車。自20世紀70年代以來，庫裏奇巴所在地區常常以犧牲環境爲代價追求經濟增長，而庫裏奇巴卻實施了環保和可持續發展計劃。其他城市往往受惠於地理或歷史的偶然。
San Francisco, for instance, sits on a small peninsula in a prime location, ensuring that its population would be packed tightly together and be amenable to using public transportation. It also catches a break because it developed as a center of finance and other service industries for people in urban centers that are somewhat messier than San Francisco, but support the city in its cushy, albeit energy-efficient, lifestyle.
以舊金山爲例，它坐落在一個位置絕佳的狹小半島上，這導致舊金山的人口分佈緊湊，人們願意使用公共交通。另一方面，舊金山還得益於金融中心和其他服務產業的定位。市中心雖然較爲混雜，但是這裏的居民卻以崇尚輕鬆愉快、高能效的生活方式，支持城市的綠色發展。
Experts in urban planning and related fields acknowledge that there are many ways to measure energy efficiency — or energy intensity, an idea that encompasses the quantity and quality of energy consumed — and that any assessment must include a degree of subjectivity. Some surveys adjust the measurement of a city’s energy intensity to include not just how much its residents consume but also how much others consume on their behalf.
城市規劃相關領域的專家承認，測量能源效率或單位產值能耗——它涵蓋了能源消耗的數量和質量——有多種途徑，而且任何評估方式都會帶有一定程度的主觀性。一些調查會調整城市的單位產值能耗，不僅包括該城市居民消耗的能源，還包括其他地方代替該城市消耗的能源。
“It’s awfully hard to find one metric to declare who’s the winner,” said Clinton Andrews, a professor of urban planning and policy development at Rutgers University.
“要找到一個衡量標準來判定誰最環保是非常困難的，”羅格斯大學(Rutgers University)城市規劃和政策發展研究教授克林頓·安德魯斯(Clinton Andrews)說。
“One way is to count all greenhouse emissions within your city boundaries, from car exhausts, chimneys, power plants, industrial facilities,” he said. “A lot of people think that’s not a good accounting scheme and propose that wherever electricity is generated, you’re responsible for those emissions.”
“一種方法是計算城市內包括汽車尾氣、煙囪、發電廠和工業設施在內的所有溫室氣體的排放量。”他說，“但是很多人認爲這種計算方法不好，他們提出不論所用的電力源自哪裏，你都應該對發電所排放的溫室氣體負責。”
That includes fuel burned to transport food to the table or to take residents to far-flung locales for vacations or business meetings. They also get the bill for energy spent elsewhere to make goods that are consumed in some cities.
這就包括把食物運輸到餐桌以及居民前往遙遠的地方度假或開會所消耗的燃料。在別處生產、在本地消費的商品也算作本地的能源消耗。
“It can add up to a much larger carbon footprint,” Mr. Andrews said. “If you’re a rich city, you’re going to be responsible for a lot of consumption. San Francisco and New York start to not look so good.”
“一旦這些數字相加，碳足跡就大了很多，”安德魯斯說，“富裕的城市會消耗大量的能源。這樣看來，舊金山和紐約的情況就不那麼好了。”
New York looks considerably worse in a study released this spring in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that assessed the world’s 27 largest metropolitan areas, or “megacities,” on energy, water use and solid waste production per capita. New York was the worst in all three categories.
美國國家科學院院刊(Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)今年春季發佈了一項對全世界27個超級城市的人均能耗、用水和固體垃圾的研究。其中，紐約的表現相當糟糕，三個類別均墊底。
Evaluations of energy intensity often adjust for differences in economic development, industrial bases, climates, population density and other factors to make a more equal comparison.
爲了公平評估單位產值能耗，常常需要根據以下因素進行調整：經濟發展水平、工業基礎、氣候、人口密度等等。
The drawback then is that “every city ends up being the same,” said Christopher Kennedy, a professor of civil engineering at the University of Toronto and the lead author on the megacities study.
缺點是“結果每個城市都一樣，”多倫多大學(University of Toronto)土木工程教授、超級城市研究的主要作者克里斯托弗·肯尼迪(Christopher Kennedy)說道。
Another way to compare cities is one economic or social segment at a time, such as transportation or industry, said Anu Ramaswami, a professor of science, technology and public policy at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs of the University of Minnesota.
另一種比較的方法是一次只比較經濟或社會的一個層面，比如運輸或工業。明尼蘇達大學(University of Minnesota)亨弗裏公共事務學院(Humphrey School of Public Affairs)科學、技術和公共政策教授阿努·拉馬斯瓦米(Anu Ramaswami)說。
“It’s better to talk about energy intensity by sector — how much is used per household or to produce so much” economic output “or industrial goods or to move people,” Ms. Ramaswami said. Taking such an approach, she added, “New York consistently comes out as more efficient on all measures.”
“根據行業來討論單位產值能耗較爲合理——每個家庭使用了多少能源，或達到一定產值、生產一定數量的商品和轉移人員各需要消耗多少能源，”拉馬斯瓦米說。此外她還說，如果採取這種方法，“紐約在各衡量標準上都顯得更有效率了。”
Among the 27 megacities, Mr. Kennedy admires Paris and Rio de Janeiro. Both cities have little heavy industry and use electricity from cleaner sources: nuclear in Paris and hydroelectric and ethanol from sugar cane in Rio.
在27個超級城市中，肯尼迪推崇巴黎和里約熱內盧。這兩個城市幾乎沒有重工業，它們的電力也來自較爲清潔的能源：巴黎使用核能，而里約熱內盧用水力發電，並把甘蔗製成酒精。
“One way to reduce pollution is to reduce use of energy,” he said. “Another is to reduce the carbon intensity of the electricity you use. I think that’s the easier way.”
“減少污染的一種途徑是減少使用能源，”他說，“另一種方式是減少電的碳強度。我覺得這是更加簡單的一種方式。”
Shanghai is at the other end of the spectrum. It burns a lot of a coal for residential and industrial consumption. In Mr. Kennedy’s view, it’s a city that “needs a lot of work.”
上海則處於另一個極端。家庭和工業通過燃燒大量的煤炭來獲得能源。根據肯尼迪的觀點，這樣的城市“還有很長的路要走”。
An inefficient city that is not “mega” is Denver. It derives electricity from high-carbon sources, is spread over a wide area and has cold winters, Mr. Kennedy said.
丹佛雖然不是超級城市，但卻是低效的。肯尼迪說它的電力嚴重依賴煤炭資源，分佈區域寬廣，冬天還非常寒冷。
Mr. Andrews tends to find greater energy efficiency among “modest-sized cities that still have crops growing nearby and where you can walk to school or work,” such as San Luis Obispo, Calif., Saratoga Springs, N.Y., and the Dutch town of Delft.
安德魯斯發現，“附近種着莊稼，人們走路上學、上班的中等規模的城市，”其能源使用效率較高，例如加利福尼亞州的聖路易斯-奧比斯保、紐約州薩拉託加斯普林斯以及荷蘭的小鎮代爾夫特。
A larger city that fits the bill for him is Philadelphia, with its pedestrian-friendly downtown, well-functioning mass transit and nearby farms.
符合他這種要求的一座較大都市是費城。那裏的城區適合步行，公共交通運行良好，農場就在不遠處。
It also has chemical plants in the vicinity, Mr. Andrews said. “They’re living with their industrial past and present,” he said. “But they’re finding ways to make the city livable and perform well, even if it’s not the most economically vibrant city.”
不過安德魯斯表示，費城附近也有化工廠。“他們在消化自身的工業歷史和現實，”他說。“但他們在想方設法讓費城宜居、表現良好，雖說那裏並不算很有經濟活力的城市。”
His candidates for least energy-efficient locales include Guangzhou, the southeast Chinese industrial city where coal generates much of the power and where buildings and road systems are poorly designed. He offered similar criticism of Lagos, the Nigerian capital. “They have achieved all the costs of agglomeration without all the benefits of it,” he said.
他挑選的能效最低的地方包括中國東南部的工業城市廣州。那裏的能源有很大一部分來自煤炭，建築和道路系統也設計糟糕。他對尼日利亞首都拉各斯有類似的批評。“他們付出了集中帶來的所有代價，這方面的好處卻一點也沒有享受到。”
Two inefficient American cities that he highlighted are Houston, where downtown high-rises are hard to air-condition and where driving is essential for work or recreation, and San Jose, about which he said: “It’s all there. Just try to get to any of it.”
他指出了兩座能效低的美國城市，一是休斯頓、二是聖何塞。休斯頓的城區高樓大廈難以調節室內溫度，居民的通勤和休閒活動都必須開車。至於聖何塞，他說：“那裏什麼都有。就是去哪裏都不容易。”
What many efficient, low-energy-intensity cities have in common is that the factors contributing to their benign profiles produce other benefits, making the cities pleasant places to live, Mr. Andrews said.
安德魯斯稱，許多能源效率高、強度低的城市有一個共同點，那就是令它們在這方面表現良好的一些因素也會帶來其他益處，讓那裏適宜生活。
“If you stop burning coal in inefficient power plants, you’re going to improve air quality, and if you do urban design so you can walk places, you’re going to be healthier and you won’t burn lots of gas,” he said. “A lot of what improves energy efficiency improves quality of life.”
“如果停止在低能效的發電廠燒煤，就會改善空氣質量。如果把城市設計成利於步行，就會讓人更健康，也不用燒很多汽油，”他說。“改進能效的很多方面也會改進生活質量。”
