气候一号：拒绝沉默的科学家

好吧，库查，这一集的内容有点沉重。我们要讨论这场针对科学的针对性运动。

Well, Kucha, this episode is a little bit of a tough one. We're gonna talk about this targeted campaign against science.

是啊。很难轻松地说出我们日常依赖的东西正在被抹去，对吧？

Yeah. Not a lot of easy ways to say that stuff is getting erased that we depend on every day. Right?

没错。但也有许多积极的事情发生。很多科学家正在站出来，挑战对他们毕生工作的抹杀，我们也会听到这些故事。

Yeah. And there's a lot of good happening. There are a lot of scientists taking a stand and challenging this erasure of their life's work, and, we'll hear about that too.

是的。所以听众朋友们，我们要讨论的话题可能不那么令人愉快，但仍有光明的一面，我们会一起探讨。那么让我们开始吧。你怎么看，阿丽亚娜？

Yeah. So, listener, we're gonna talk about some stuff that is not, like, chipper, but there is a bright side, and we will go there together. So let's get into it. What do you think, Ariana?

对。请继续收听。我是阿丽亚娜·布罗克斯。

Yeah. So stick with us. I'm Ariana Brochus.

我是库山·阿瓦达尔。

And I'm Kushan Avadar.

这里是《气候一号》。事实和科学正遭受真实攻击，主要来自特朗普政府。这至关重要，因为它影响着我们每一个人。

And this is Climate One. Facts and science are under real attack right now, mostly coming from the Trump administration. And this is critical because it affects each and every one of us.

正如我们今天将从嘉宾那里听到的，联邦政府独立公开的研究与创新为我们的生活奠定了诸多基础，而特朗普正在砍掉这些项目。

And as we're gonna hear from our guests today, the independent publicly available research and innovation done through the federal government provides the foundation for a lot of our lives, and Trump is axing it.

我是说，听众此刻能听到我们的声音，正是基于政府研究开发的技术。

I mean, listeners hearing our voices right now, that's because of technology based on government research.

知道还有什么源自政府研究吗？举几个例子：触控屏、全球定位系统、计算机、你口袋里的手机、运行其上的互联网——这还只是冰山一角。

You know what else is based on government research? Here are a few things. Touch screens, GPS, computers, the cell phone in your pocket, the Internet that runs on it, and that's barely scratching the surface.

没错。此外还有各类联邦咨询小组和科学委员会，他们评估各种领域的研究，帮助我们获取信息、保持健康与安全。然而自一月份以来，特朗普政府一直在全面打压科学，尤其是气候科学。他们删除了包括国家气候评估在内的数据库、工具和网站，实际上还停止收集各类数据，比如温室气体报告项目和十亿美元级气象灾害统计——剧透警告：这类灾害正持续增加。

Right. In addition, there's all kinds of, federal advisory panels and scientific boards that evaluate research on all manner of things to help us be informed and healthy and safe. And yet, since January, the Trump administration has been carrying out a full fledged campaign against science and in particular, climate science. The Trump administration has erased databases, tools, and websites, including the National Climate Assessment, And, actually, they've just stopped collecting data of all kinds too, like the greenhouse gas reporting program and the number of billion dollar weather disasters, which, spoiler alert, keeps rising.

许多听众可能已经意识到，政府还裁减了各部门数千名职业科学家，终止了对各类研究机构和项目的资助。阿丽亚娜，我们在近期的节目中也讨论过——他们废除了既有的环境保护措施。

And a lot of listeners probably realize that the government has also laid off thousands of career scientists across departments and ended funding for all kinds of research and agencies. And we talked about this in recent episodes, Ariana. They've they've rolled back established environmental protections.

是的。不仅如此，特朗普领导的环境保护署目前正试图削弱其监管二氧化碳排放等地球温室污染物的法定权限。但科学家们绝不会坐视毕生心血消失，这正是我们今天要探讨的内容。

Yes. And in addition, right now, Trump's EPA is working to undermine its own authority to regulate earth warming pollutants like carbon dioxide emissions. But scientists are not about to let their life's work vanish, and that's what we're talking about today.

正如你所说，科学家们正在采取行动，阿丽亚娜。从环保署前研究员到独立学者，许多人维护着开放数据库，其他人则在新的平台上继续基础研究，比如国家气候评估工作——他们进行这些工作并未获得政府批准。

Scientists are taking action, like you said, Ariana, from former EPA researchers to independent academics, and many are maintaining open access databases. Others are continuing fundamental research, like the work that goes into the national climate assessment on new platforms, And they're doing it without the administration's blessing.

他们公开反对特朗普政府并动员起来继续开展重要工作，同时也承担着个人风险。

And they're also taking personal risk by speaking out against the Trump administration and mobilizing to continue doing their important work.

布兰登·琼斯是持续推动科学发展的代表人物。他在联邦政府担任科学家超过二十年，其中十二年在环保署工作。就在第二届特朗普政府上任前夕，他辞去职务成为美国地球物理联合会主席，而新政府对这一领域的对待方式令他震惊。

Brandon Jones is someone continuing to make science happen. He worked as a scientist in the federal government for more than twenty years. Twelve of those were at the EPA. And he left his position just before the start of the second Trump administration to become president of the American Geophysical Union, and he's been stunned by the way this new government has treated his field.

我将自然科学视为自然与物理真理的守护者——关于地球的真相、地球运行规律及其在太阳系中的位置等所有这类知识。因此从哲学角度思考时，面对削减科研经费、影响科研人员职业发展等对科学的攻击，我不禁质疑：难道真理没有价值吗？为何我们不愿了解地球运作机制、人类与地球的共生关系以及如何更可持续地生存？这让我陷入思维漩涡：幕后究竟有什么力量在阻止真相浮现？

I see the natural and physical sciences as the caretakers of natural and physical truth. The truth about the earth, the truth about how the earth works and its position in our solar system, all of those kinds of things. And so when I think about it philosophically, the attacks on science, cutting funding, impacting people's careers and things of that nature, I'm thinking about, wow, is truth not value? Why do we not wanna know about how the earth works and the interoperability of humans in the earth and how we can live more sustainably, etcetera. So I go down this rabbit hole of, well, what's what's going on behind the scenes that we don't want truth to come out?

你会觉得这是针对你个人的吗？

Do you take it personally?

这就像坐过山车。有些日子我像胆小狮子，明明知道需要勇气却自我怀疑——为何会有这种被针对的感觉？而另些日子我又充满斗志。有时候重点在于历程本身。当你问及我在环保署的岁月，甚至包括现在，回顾这些年我始终认为：核心在于真理。

You know, that's like a roller coaster ride. So some some days, I feel like the cowardly lion, where where I know I need to have courage, but I'm like, I don't know if I and and why am I feeling this way and and, you know, to taking it personal. And then, the next days, I just wanna come out swinging. Sometimes it is about the journey. So when you're asking me about my time at EPA and when I thought about it and and even where I am now, it's like, I reflect over all those years, and I'm thinking, it's about truth.

是的。

Yeah.

让我们深入探讨这点：为何联邦政府体系内独立科学研究工作具有特殊重要性？

Let's dig into that a little bit. Why why is the work of independent science and research done within the federal government specifically so important?

我认为首要的一点是，我要对比公共资助的科研与私营部门科研的差异。并非贬低私营部门，但私营领域的科研往往服务于特定利益相关者，追求短期目标与特定用途。而公共资助的研究，在我看来，是为了全人类的福祉。

I would say, number one, and and I'm gonna compare what publicly funded science is to how it shows up in the private sector. And I'm not, you know, no diss to the private sector, but there's lots of science that goes on in the private sector. But it's for stakeholders. It's for short time scales and it's for a specific purpose and a specific reason. And publicly funded research, in my mind, is for the benefit of all.

因此，公共资助研究产出的任何成果都不受特殊利益驱使。如果是联邦资助项目，通常经过独立且竞争性的评审流程，确保汇集最顶尖的人才。由此产生的科研成果具有高度可信度——无论是决策制定、问题解决方案、实际应用还是工具开发，都能为社会整体进步提供可靠支撑。

So whatever the products come or are developed out of publicly funded research, there was no special interest that was guiding that. It was through an independent, if it's federal funding, oftentimes competitive process, and therefore, there are the best minds for that particular project. So then the products that come out of that can be trusted so that there's that there's high confidence in the decisions that are made, the solutions that are created, the applicability, and the tools that are developed so that there's a betterment of society overall.

嗯，你是说利益相关者就是公众。

Yeah. The stakeholders are the public, you're saying.

完全正确。对。是的。没错。

That's correct. Yep. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

不是股东，是利益相关者。对的。

Not shareholders, but stakeholders. Correct.

是啊。确实。特朗普政府曾大规模裁减联邦雇员，特别是科学相关机构的职位。

Yeah. Right. Right. Right. The Trump administration has done massive layoffs of federal employees, particularly in the science related agencies.

作为美国地球物理学会（AGU）的主席，你们曾就这些人员裁减提起诉讼。最近联邦法官裁定特朗普政府无差别解雇关键岗位联邦雇员的行为违法。这对被解雇的联邦科学家意味着什么？他们会复职吗？还是职位就此空缺？你的看法是？

AGU, the the American Geophysical Union that you're the president of, you've all been involved in some lawsuits regarding these personnel cuts, and a federal judge recently ruled that the Trump administration broke the law by indiscriminately firing federal workers in essential roles. What will that mean for federal scientists who are let go? Will they be rehired? Will it just be unfilled? What what's your take?

首先，从宏观层面来看，这对众多科学家以及支持科学家工作的机构员工来说，是巨大的士气提振。就士气而言，在经历了过去近十个月后，这将带来积极影响。但效果取决于各机构的具体表现。回顾二月份政府大规模解雇试用期员工时，不同机构的处理方式就存在差异，我认为这次情况也会类似。正如你提到的，当时决策显得草率，似乎缺乏深思熟虑。

First, just kinda at a high level, it's a huge morale booster for so many scientists and so many of the staff at the agencies that support scientists. So, as far as morale, giving the last almost ten months, it's gonna be great. It's gonna depend on how the agencies show up. If you go back and look in February when those probationary employees were just let go across the government, Some agencies handled it differently than others, and I think that's gonna be the case here. As you mentioned, was indiscriminate, but there didn't seem to be much thought behind it either.

当时的情况就是简单粗暴地宣布'我们要这么做'，随后又出现大量补救说辞——'我们不知道联邦政府有这个职能'、'不清楚这是联邦服务范畴'。

It it was just, hey. We're just gonna do this. And then there was lots of backtracking. Oh, we didn't know that the federal government did this. We didn't know this was a federal service.

我希望这类信息已开始向公众传播，因为我不确定有多少民众真正理解联邦政府为他们提供的服务。他们缴纳的税款，特别是投入科学领域的部分，带来了巨大效益——无论是高风险高回报的创新（如谷歌、GPS、智能手机等技术），还是教育实践等需要多年科研积累的长期项目，都深刻影响着民众生活。

And I hope that that kind of information has begun to filter out into the general public, because I don't know how much of our our citizenry really understands what the federal government does for them. So much of, their taxes that go to federal support, in particular in the sciences, provides such great service to them. Whether it be high risk, high reward innovations, they use Google, they use GPS, they have cell phones and all the technology. Or if it's something a little longer term like educational practices and and what's the best way for students to learn. I mean, that takes years of scientific research.

这里涉及一个关键问题——长期视角的重要性。随着特朗普政府削减机构项目和科研经费，我们流失了大量经验丰富的专业人员。部分人才正被其他行业甚至其他国家招募。嗯...

It's a really important point here with that sense of of longevity and looking over the time horizon because the Trump's agency and program cuts. And with all that research to funding, we've lost so many experienced professionals. And some of those talents are being recruited by other sectors. They're being recruited by other countries in some cases. So Mhmm.

请详细分析这方面的影响，特别是人才流失问题。这对美国科研界将产生怎样的短期和长期影响？

Walk me through that aspect, like the the potential brain drain, I guess. What will the short and long term impact of this be on the the science and research communities in The US specifically?

确实至关重要。先看国内情况：人才正在向其他行业流动。这本身无可厚非...

Yeah. That's a huge point. Let's start domestically. There's a movement into other sectors within the country. Fine.

科学事业的范畴本就超越联邦科研、私营部门或学术界。我们始终需要科学思维渗透各个领域——坦白说，决策层更需要具备科学思维的人才。试问国会山上有多少科学家？我不得而知。

This I mean, the scientific enterprise was always larger than federal science or private sector federal science or science that was conducted in academia. We've always needed scientific thinkers everywhere. I I would dare say we need a lot more folks who think scientifically in our decision making halls and realms. You know, how many scientists are on the Capitol Hill? I don't know.

是啊。

Yeah.

是啊。我是说，不多对吧？

Yeah. Mean, not not a lot. Right?

律师比科学家多得多。有时候你可以两者兼顾，但是，

More more lawyers than scientists. More more more Sometimes you can have both, but,

我听说对。确实如此。你知道的，律师和和和企业家在

I hear Right. Yeah. That's true. You know, lawyers and and and business owners on

国会山或曾经在

Capitol Hill or used to

听着好吧。所以你懂的。是啊。我是说，对。

listen to Okay. So you know. Yeah. Yeah. Mean, yeah.

我我我会代表我自己发言。

I'm I'm I'll speak for myself.

我现在是对着唱诗班讲话了。但另一方面，人才从本国流失到其他国家的问题确实严重。我在美国与一些早期和中期职业科学家交谈过，他们告诉我，其他国家的高校或研究实验室、设施等正在向他们提供职位机会。大约75到80年前，是来自欧洲某些国家甚至亚洲的科学家因曼哈顿计划等项目来到美国。而现在，情况似乎正朝着相反方向缓慢流动。

I'm talking to the choir now. So but but on this other side of brain drain out of the nation into other countries, That's a serious issue. I have talked to some early career and mid career scientists here in The States who have told me they're being offered options and positions in other countries at universities or research labs, facilities, and things of that nature. So now seventy five, eighty years ago, it was scientists from certain countries in Europe and maybe even in Asia that were coming over, with the Manhattan Project and things of that nature. And it it looks like it's there's a slow trickle in the opposite direction.

是啊。

Yeah.

今年四月，特朗普总统解雇了数百名负责编制《国家气候评估》的科学家——我想你们组织对此特别关注。这是我们关于气候与变暖影响最重要的报告，每四年发布一次，包含气候如何实时影响各行业的关键可靠数据。你们组织美国地球物理联盟与美国气象学会联手合作。

In April, president Trump dismissed hundreds of scientists working to compile the National Climate Assessment, which your organization, I think, has a specific interest in. It's it's our biggest report on climate and warming impacts. It's released every four years. It contains critical robust information about how climate is affecting industries and sectors in real time. Your organization, the American Geophysical Union, and the American Meteorological Society joined forces.

我觉得创建这样一个集中平台来收集未来几年的气候研究非常有意思。请详细说说，为什么这个平台如此重要？

And I thought this was really interesting to create a centralized place, kinda like a platform to collect climate research during the next couple years. Tell me more about that. Why is it important?

感谢提到这个。正如你所说，这个合作项目春季启动，据我了解门户网站即将正式上线，可能月底前就能完成。这里不仅是400名被解雇作者和工作人员继续推进科研的基地，更是全球所有从事气候相关研究人员的聚集地。

Yeah. Thanks for bringing that up. So the partnership came together, as you mentioned, in the spring, and officially will be, from what I understand, will be launching, like, the the portal soon, probably by the end of the month. Okay. Here's the place for not just all 400 of the authors who were dismissed and the staff to still come and ensure that the the research and the science continues, but anyone else who is involved in climate related research globally.

美国地球物理联盟是国际性组织。回到科研事业的理念——我们需要为全球气候研究者提供平台。这里就是你们的归属。虽然过去有《国家气候评估》，但我们建立这套基础设施不是为了取代它，而是确保科研工作持续运转。

AGU is a global organization. And so, again, back to this notion of the research enterprise and having a place for anyone who's involved in, climate related research. Here's the place for you to come. Yes. It used to be the National Climate Assessment, but we wanted to build some infrastructure not to replace the assessment, but to ensure that science keeps moving.

至于评估本身，还存在法律问题。因为这是国会授权的，联邦政府必须设法满足要求。而科学界此举正是要表明：我们正在捍卫科学。

Now, the the assessment itself, there's a legal issue. Right? Because it's congressionally mandated. So the federal government is gonna have to figure out how to meet that requirement. This is the science community coming together to say we are standing up for science.

在这个特定情况下，我们明白气候变化及其影响对所有人类而言都是生死攸关的问题。嗯。对整个星球也是如此。这无关地缘政治博弈，气候变化也不分国界或地缘政治界限。这是全球每个人都在面对的问题，因此我们希望确保这项工作能持续下去。这是基于最新研究和专家意见所呈现的当前气候状况。

And in this particular instance, we understand that changing climate and the impacts of climate is existential to all humans Mhmm. To the the whole planet. This is not there's no geopolitical kind of spin on this and and and climate change, and there's nothing about national, you know, geopolitical or or national boundaries. This is an issue that everyone on the planet is facing, so we wanted to make sure it was gonna continue. This is the state of what's going on in the climate at this point from the latest research, from the latest experts.

因此我们高度确信，这份文件与其他文件一样，将成为决策基础，涉及气候影响、经济、健康、韧性、社区建设等所有相关领域。

So there's a high level of confidence that this is what we need to be a foundational document along with the others for decision making as it relates to climate impacts, the economy, health, resiliency, community building, all of those things.

布兰登，当你作为一名年轻科学家起步时，是否预料到自己会进入一个如此政治化的领域？

Brandon, when you started as a young scientist, were you expecting to enter a field that would be so political?

我初入科学界时想成为海洋学家——虽然生长在俄亥俄这个内陆州，但我常去钓鱼。家人带我游遍俄亥俄垂钓，回家后我就会看雅克·库斯托的纪录片。看着湖溪池塘里的小鱼，我意识到海洋里还有更广阔的世界，就这样建立了与海洋的联系。我一直只想从事海洋生物或海洋学相关的工作。

When I started as a young scientist, I wanted to be an oceanographer, grew up in Ohio, landlocked state, but I would fish. My family took me fishing all around Ohio, but then I would come home and I would watch Jacques Cousteau. And so I would like, oh, these little fish that I'm finding in the lakes and streams ponds. And then there's this whole world out there in the ocean, and so that connection was made there. And so I always just wanted to do something in the marine biological realm or oceanography.

所以不，我选择这条职业道路纯粹出于热爱和求知欲。从本科进入研究生阶段时，我才逐渐意识到这些信息对人们的实用价值。在攻读硕士和博士学位期间，我的观念开始转变——我意识到除了基础科研，更重要的是如何让需要的人获取这些知识。

And so, no, I was I was moving into that career path or that interest trajectory because I liked it, because I wanted to understand. As I was moving out of undergrad into graduate school, then it became more like, oh, this is the kind of information that people can use that would be helpful for them. And so as I moved through my master's and PhD matriculation, that's when the kind of shift started to happen. Said, alright. Okay.

是的。科学本身很好，基础研究也很必要，这些我都做过。但我更关注如何将研究成果传递给需要的人——这最终引领我走向公共服务领域。

Yes. Science is good. The discovery, basic research, we need that, and I've done that. But how can I get this information into the hands of the people that need it? And so that led me into public service.

当时我本可以选择学术道路——确实收到了高校助理教授的聘书，但我认为联邦政府才是能实现变革的地方。不过回答你的问题：不，我从未预料到有天我们需要在最基本的层面上，为探索我们所栖居星球的认知权而辩护。

So instead of going the and I had offers from academic institutions to come and be a professor, you know, assistant professor, but I I felt like the federal government was gonna be the place where I could I could make a change. But to your your answer, no. I did not expect that we would get to a point where we would have to, at the basic level, just defend seeking understanding of of the planet we live on.

你认为当今的年轻科学家在进入科研领域时，是否会将政治气候纳入他们的考量之中？

Do you think that young scientists today have that awareness of the political climate that they're entering into as part of their calculus?

从个人观察来看，我认为他们比我们同龄时——或者说在我们职业生涯的同期阶段——要清醒得多，因为他们是在这种环境中成长起来的。

Anecdotally, I think they're way more aware than many of us were at their age or at least at that at the time of the their careers that we were in because they've grown up in it.

你觉得这会以某种方式改变科学吗？我是说，政治与科学如此紧密交织并非首次。这种情况确实由来已久。这会影响人们接触科学的方式吗？从从事科研的人开始？

Do you feel like that is going to change science in any way? I mean, it's not the first time that politics and science have become so intertwined. I mean, that that goes True. Way far back. Like, is that gonna affect the the way that people engage with science from the from the people doing the science?

我认为会的，比如我在AGU就看到了实例。有个叫'繁荣地球交换'的项目，已有十三四年历史。它专门将地球科学专业知识与有需求的社区进行匹配。我相信科学最终会本地化分布，而非集中在学术殿堂、联邦政府机构或私营企业实验室里。现在人们会要求获取信息来改善生活。

I think it is, and and I see it, for instance, at AGU. There's a program called the Thriving Earth Exchange, and it's, thirteen, fourteen years old or so. And it's an intentional matching of geoscience expertise with communities who have needs. And so I believe that science is going to end up distributed locally and not being concentrated in the the halls of academia or the agencies in the federal government or in the labs of the private sector. I believe now people are going to demand that they have access to information so that they can live better.

明白吗？这种存在主义危机不仅是全球性的，还会根据个人身份、生活地域和经历以截然不同的方式显现。所以人们会提出这种需求，他们会想要知情权。

You know? It's the existentialism is not just yes. It's global, but it's showing up in very different and unique ways depending on who you are and where you live and what you're going through. And so people are gonna demand that. They're gonna wanna know.

因此，是的。科学方法本身不会改变——毕竟这保证了可信度与公信力，包括同行评审、可重复性等确保科学严谨性的要素。但研究开展方式...

So, yes. So science the scientific method is not gonna change. Sure. How we conduct research because that gives the credibility, that gives the confidence. There's the peer review, reproducibility, all those kinds of things that keeps the science solid.

但科学如何传播、谁能获取、由谁资助——如果联邦政府不参与，所有这些都将发生改变。

But how it's distributed, who has access, who's going to support it, if the federal government's not, all of that, it it's it's gonna change.

哇，确实。这是一个非常有趣且我认为很有价值的见解。我了解到你曾被CBC的一篇文章提及，将你描述为‘美国气候抵抗运动’的代表人物，感觉这时候应该配上《星球大战》的主题曲。对吧。

Wow. Yeah. It's very that's a really interesting and, I think, valuable insight. I have come to learn that you were among some people listed in a CBC article describing you as the, quote, US climate resistance, and I feel like you have to cue the theme from Star Wars there. Like, Yeah.

你对这个描述有何感想？

How do you feel about that description?

永远考虑冰川，正如我T恤上写的那样。

Always consider glaciers, as my shirt would say.

听众们，他现在正穿着一件T恤，上面真的写着‘永远考虑冰川’。

So He's wearing a shirt right now, listeners. That literally says always consider glaciers.

这是我的战袍。不，我并不知道组织会把我列进去，但我对此感到坦然。还有那么多其他领导者，我听说过或认识的许多人，尤其是那些在社区层面为推动气候、气候变化及气候影响议题做出更多贡献的人。能被视为这个群体的一员，我认为是一种荣誉。

This is my cape. No. I I wasn't aware that the organization would would list me up, and I'm fine with that. There are so many other leaders, many that I know of, know, and many that I know personally that have done so much more to advance the issues around climate and climate change and climate impacts, especially at the community level. And so just to even be considered to be part of that group, I think it's an honor.

我觉得我需要尽我所能，甚至比我已做的更多，以符合我在这个世界行事风格的方式推进这项事业，这样我的影响力圈仍能感到与我的联系并信任我。当我带着信息出现时，他们会说‘好吧，因为我们信任布兰登’，或因为布兰登与这个网络有联系，或与美国地球物理联合会有联系，或是前联邦官员，我们所说的就具有可信度。我认为我们所有人都应努力成为这样的使者，作为抵抗运动或促进气候韧性团体的一部分。

I feel like I need to do as much as I can and more than I've done to advance this cause in a way that fits how I move in the, you know, kinda in the world so that my circles of influence still feel connected to me and and and trust me. And so that when I show up with information, they'll say, okay. Because we trust Brandon or because Brandon's connected to this network or connected to the AGU or was a former Fed, there's confidence and credibility in what what we're saying. And I think all of us could strive to be those kind of ambassadors as part of the resistance or or the the group that is promoting resilience around climate.

布兰登·琼斯是美国地球物理联合会主席。布兰登，非常感谢你抽出时间与我们交流。

Brandon Jones is the president of the American Geophysical Union. Brandon, thanks so much for spending time with us.

非常感谢邀请我参加。这次经历非常棒。

Thank you so much for having me. This has been great.

接下来，环境保护局的新任局长希望从根本上改变该机构的使命。

Coming up, the new head of the Environmental Protection Agency wants to fundamentally change the agency's mission.

如果你思考一下环保局在这些领域中的角色，对我们一些人来说很明显这意味着要退出干预。

And if you kind of think about what EPA's role would be in some of those spaces, then it was pretty clear to some of us that it would mean getting out of the way.

更多内容请继续关注《气候一号》。

That's up next when Climate One continues.

广告打断您收听《气候一号》的体验是否让您感到困扰？

Are you frustrated by ads interrupting your Climate One listening experience?

那么我们有好消息告诉您。加入我们的Patreon会员即可享受无广告收听节目的特权。

Then we have good news for you. Members of our Patreon receive ad free access to our show.

每月仅需5美元，您既能支持我们重要的气候对话，又能完全无广告地收听《气候一号》。

For just $5 a month, you support our critical climate conversations while also gaining access to Climate One totally free of ads.

Patreon会员还可自动加入Climate One的Discord服务器，与志同道合的气候爱好者及我们团队成员交流互动。

Patreon members also receive automatic access to the Climate One Discord server, where fellow climate enthusiasts can chat with each other and members of our team.

作为对常听播客听众的特别优惠，我们现为Patreon支持者提供专属福利。今日使用代码climate pod加入，首月仅需1美元。

As a special offer for frequent podcast listeners, we're now offering Patreon supporters a special deal. Join today using the code climate pod, and you'll get your first month for just $1.

代码拼写为c l I m a t e p o d，无空格。访问patreon.com/climateone即可找到我们。接下来您将听到，环境保护署数月来一直处于动荡之中。前EPA环境工程师韦斯·英格森从该署研究与开发办公室的岗位上目睹了这一切。在EPA任职期间，英格森开发了一个将经济与环境数据配对的数据库，供行业或政府审查其供应链。

That's c l I m a t e p o d, no spaces. Find us at patreon.com/climateone. As we're about to hear, the Environmental Protection Agency has been in turmoil for months. Former EPA environmental engineer Wes Ingerson witnessed this from his position within the agency's office of research and development. In his time at EPA, Ingerson developed a database that pairs economic and environmental data to let an industry or government examine their supply chain.

该数据库名为《美国环境扩展投入产出表》（简称US EEIO）。英格森表示其最初旨在帮助减少浪费和环境影响，但现已成为众多企业碳排放报告的基础工具。

It's called The US Environmentally Extended Input Output or US EEIO for short. Ingerson says it was originally developed to help reduce waste and environmental impacts, but it's become a fundamental tool for carbon emissions reporting for lots of companies.

我们提供覆盖美国经济中所有生产或消费商品服务的排放因子。任何关注碳足迹的组织——当他们采购各类不同商品服务时——都会用到我们的数据。因此用户遍布所有行业。虽无法精确统计用户数量，但Watershed公司的研究表明，在报告此类温室气体排放的企业中，约65%使用了我们的模型（占大多数），其余采用了他们自建或Watershed提供的兼容模型。由此可知用户群体庞大。此外，我们的供应链温室气体排放因子数据集已成为政府数据门户data.gov过去几年最受欢迎的数据集。

We provide emission factors across all goods and services that are produced or consumed in the the The US economy. And any organization that's interested in footprinting, and they're they're they're acquiring lots of different goods and services. So our users tend to tend to come from across all sectors. We don't know exactly how many users that we've had, but, Watershed has done a study and determined that about 65% of companies that reported these types of greenhouse gas emissions either used our model, the majority of users, or some used their own model, compatible model from Watershed. So that we know there's a lot of users out there, and also our our our supply chain greenhouse gas emission factors has been the most popular dataset on the government data portal, data.gov, for, the last couple of years.

因此我们确信其下载使用频率极高。

So we know it's very heavily downloaded and used.

是的。自发布以来你们每年都更新这个数据库。请谈谈向公众和行业免费提供这种政府工具的价值所在。

Yeah. You all have been updating this database annually since its release. Tell me a bit about the value of providing a resource like this, a government tool to the general public to industry for free.

我认为这对他们而言具有多方面的价值。首先，它涵盖了所有类型的商品和服务，非常全面且包容，不会对特定行业存在偏见。作为EPA的产物，这套数据集被认为更具可信度和权威性。此外，我们提供的方式——任何人都可以免费下载使用，不仅最终因子免费，连构建这些因子的所有源代码及背后文档都已公开发布。

It's valuable, I think, to them in a a number of ways. One, it's it's a very comprehensive and and in including all all types of goods and services. It doesn't have bias against particular sectors. I mean, coming out of the EPA, it's perceived to to be more credible and and authoritative as a dataset. Also, the way that we provide it, you know, being being free for anyone to download and use, and and not only the final factors are free, but all of the the source code for building them and and documentation behind it has been published.

它是开放的，可供用户使用。这种透明度和文档化的程度，恰好填补了气候报告领域的空白，我认为这些都促成了它的广泛使用。

It's open, available to users. So that that level of transparency and documentation, just the need that it filled the gap that it filled in in this space in climate reporting has, I think, all all contributed to its heavy use.

是的。那么李·泽尔丁被任命为EPA新任负责人后，发生了什么变化？

Yeah. So what changed after Lee Zeldin was appointed as the new head of the EPA?

嗯，我当时是联邦雇员，那段时期确实发生了很多变化。首先他上任时就明确表示，要将EPA缩减到仅履行最低法定职责。他还提出'伟大的美国复兴'和五大支柱计划，其中三项包括释放美国能源潜力、使美国成为全球AI中心、将汽车制造业迁回美国——最后这点有点奇怪。

Well, yeah, it so I was a federal employee during this that that period, and a whole lot changed. First of all, when he came in, I mean, it was clear. He said that he wanted to cut EPA down to to working on its minimum statutory requirements. He also came in talking about a great American comeback and and and five pillars, three of which included unleashing America's energy potential, you know, making The US the AI capital of world, moving auto manufacturing back to The US. That was a bit strange.

我们内部都在疑惑：这些内容在法规中体现在哪里？与EPA保护人类健康和环境的使命有何关联？仔细想想EPA在这些领域的角色，我们有些人就明白了——这意味着要主动让路。不过他也辩称这是美国民众的选择。

So we're we're we're wondering internally, k, where is that in the statutes and and kind of what does that have to do with EPA's mission to protect human health and the environment. And if you kind of think about that for a minute, what EPA's role would be in in some of those spaces, then it it was pretty clear to some of us that it would mean getting out of the way. But, you know, then again, he says that's what America voted for and that's how he defends it.

没错。他对此非常激进，多次接受采访谈论其推行的变革，这种强力的去监管化立场。他坚信这就是美国公众想要的。那段时间机构内部氛围如何？

Yeah. And he's been very bullish on this. I mean, he's been interviewed repeatedly about the changes he's been making, this very aggressive deregulatory approach, and he's resolute that this is what he says the American public wants. So what was it like at the agency during that time?

就在他被任命前后，我们还遭遇了Doge组织的渗透，包括EPA在内的联邦机构都受到影响。记得当时出现了第一个'岔路offer'，就像是给联邦雇员提供的逃生通道。

You know, about the time he was appointed, then we we also had, you know, Doge appearing on the scene. They were infiltrating federal agencies including EPA. Know, You we had the first fork in the road offer, you know, saying, hey. Oh, here. Here's a way out for federal employees.

我们只希望真正忠诚的人留下。我们实施了返岗办公的要求，然后就有很多对联邦员工的恶意诋毁。接着，我们的试用期员工，也就是所谓的新聘人员，那些调任新岗位或被安排进入最终行政休假的人。所以环境很艰难，可以说是开局不利。

We only want the ones that are really loyal to stay. We had the back to the office requirements, and and then there was just a lot of nasty bad mouthing of of federal employees. And and then, you know, our our probationary employees, the so called probation employees, the new hires are ones that had moved into a a new role or put in a terminal administrative leave. So it's a it's a rough environment, you know, it's kind of starting out.

等等，我想插一句。那些诋毁员工的言论，是自上而下的吗？是通过内部通讯还是什么方式传播的？

Wait. I wanna interject really quick. That bad mouthing of employees, was that happening from the top down? That was happening, like, in internal communications or what?

不，我想说的是...我主要指的是我们从政府和媒体那里听到的言论。

No. I think we're talk I'm I'm I'm referring mostly to to what we're hearing, you know, from the administration and and and the media.

明白了。

Okay.

是的。然后我们开始受到更多审查，比如门禁卡进出记录、电脑登录登出追踪。如果想开外部会议展示研究成果，还得先获得批准。而批准条件是什么？必须确保内容不仅符合五大支柱原则，还要符合白宫今年颁布的数百项行政令。

Yeah. Then we're, you know, we're also starting to be subject to a lot more scrutiny, you know, tracking of our badge ins, badge outs, our computer logins, log outs. You know, we we wanna have an external meeting to present research, then, you know, we need to get permission for for that. And how do we get permission? Well, we have to make sure that somehow aligns with not just the five pillars, but all of the hundreds of executive orders that have come out of the White House this year.

而且，局里有些部门完全被禁止发声，直接下了禁言令，连自己的支持承包商都不能联系。

And, I mean, there are other parts of the agency that just couldn't communicate at all. They were literally put on a a gag order. It couldn't even communicate with their own support contractors.

哇。

Wow.

所以当时发生了很多事情，让那里变成了一个非常可怕、令人畏惧的地方，工作真的很难继续下去。管理层在传达信息，他们有很多这样的通知，比如‘这是你们的选择，如果想拿遣散费离开’，他们试图支持我们，确保我们有机会和人聊聊正在发生的事情，以及所有这些‘如果’情景——如果你被裁员会怎样，如何应对人员精简。对，就是RIFT（裁员）。

So just lot lot of a lot of things happening that made it a very scary place, intimidating place, and and really difficult to continue the the work. I mean, management was passing down information. They had a a lot of that was just, okay, the here are what your options are if you wanna take the the fork and and get out and trying to support us just to make sure that we were having a chance to talk to someone about what was was happening and and, you know, what all of these what if scenarios, what, you know, what what if you're RIFT, you know, how would a Reduction force. Yeah. That's RIFT.

没错。我们的大量时间都被消耗在写报告、申请继续现有工作的许可，或者讨论评估未来可能发生的各种情况上，那时真的很难推进工作。到了三月份，众议院科学、空间与技术委员会传出消息，ORD将被解散。

That's right. So, I mean, so much of our time is being consumed then with with reporting, asking for permission to continue our work as is or just, you know, talking about and evaluating all of these scenarios for what could could happen in the future is very, very hard to keep the work going at that point. So then then coming into March, it it escapes from a a committee a house committee of science, space, and technology that ORD was going to be dismantled.

就是环保署下属的研究与发展办公室，你当时所在的部门。

The office of research and development, which is the office you were within at the EPA.

是的。直到七月份政府才承认这一点，但那时我们很多人都看出了苗头。不幸的是，我仍有同事留在ORD等待结果，他们既没离开也没被调岗，至今不知道会发生什么，但肯定不会留在原部门了。

Yeah. That's right. And and it took the administration until July to actually admit that, but I think a lot of us saw the writing and the the wall at this point. I mean, unfortunately, I still have colleagues in ORD left that are waiting to see what's going to happen that they haven't been they haven't left. They haven't been reassigned and and still don't know what's gonna happen, but they're they certainly won't be in the same place.

能简单介绍一下研究与发展办公室的工作内容吗？涉及很多方面吧？

Can you quickly explain the work of Office of Research and Development, what that office entailed? I mean, it's lots of things. Right?

是的。研究与发展办公室曾是独立的科研部门，为环保署所有分支提供服务，包括空气、水、废物等总部办公室，各区域办公室以及各州政府。我们的研究涵盖众多领域——单说我们的工具项目，这只是ORD数百个研究项目之一。其他研究者有的追踪饮用水铅污染，有的研究PFAS进入废水后又回流饮用水系统的过程，有的预测有害藻华，还有的识别受危险空气污染影响的高脆弱性社区。

Yeah. Office of Research and Development is a or it it has been an independent office of of science that was serving all parts of the EPA, including all of the kind of headquarters offices, like the office of air, water, waste, and as well as the regional offices and and then the the states themselves. And our research really covered lots of different areas. I mean, I've talked just about our tool, it our research project was was one of hundreds of research projects in ORD. Other researchers were doing things like, you know, tracking lead in in drinking water or, you know, studying what happens with PFAS, you know, getting into wastewater and then coming back into the drinking water system, you know, predicting harmful algal blooms, identifying communities that were subject to, you know, dangerous air pollution and vulnerable to it.

涉及范围非常广啊。

Just a whole range of things. Yeah.

是的，没错。

Yeah. That's right.

听起来那是个难以持续的工作环境。

So sounds like it was a pretty untenable environment to be working in.

对，对。那时很难维持工作推进。正如我提到的，我们感到非常不确定和惶恐。我觉得需要稍微了解联邦雇员的特点以及政府机构的文化氛围。

Yeah. Yeah. It was difficult to con to keep the work going forward in in that time. We just felt very uncertain, as I mentioned, intimidated. And I think you have to understand a little bit what federal employees like and and what's the culture like in in an agency.

总体而言，我的联邦同事们都是使命驱动型人才。在环保局，我们的使命是保护人类健康与环境。入职时每个人都宣誓效忠宪法，这实际上是对人民和使命的誓言。无论是像我这样的研究人员还是后勤行政人员，这点都一视同仁。

In general, the type of people that I worked with, the other feds, I mean, are very mission oriented driven people. At EPA, I mean, it's about protecting human health and the environment. Everyone takes an oath when they start the job, and it's really an oath to constitution. We consider it an oath to our to the people and and to our mission. And, that's across the board, whether you're a research staff like myself or, you know, a a support staff, administrative.

我认为人们深受这份使命感的驱使。联邦机构运作方式有点像军队，等级森严，人们习惯于服从命令，因为对这个体系有着深厚信任——尽管过程并不轻松。是的，需要跨越许多程序关卡，也需要极大耐心。

I think people feel really compelled by that mission. And, I mean, federal agencies operate somewhat like an an army. I mean, they're they're very hierarchical, and people are kind of used to falling in line and and taking orders because I think there's a lot of trust in the the the system that, you know, by it's it's not always easy. Yeah. There are a lot of hoops to to jump through and and patience is required.

但最终我们相信，我们的做法是正确的，我们终将完成使命。

But, I mean, in the end, there's trust that, okay. We're we're doing this the right way, and and we're going to accomplish our mission.

你觉得这种状态改变了吗？

And you feel like that changed?

是的。我想说的是，根据我在EPA的另一段经历和观察，所有政治任命官员上任时——基于我参与过的以往交接经验——通常你会预期这些官员会接受简报并花时间了解机构内部运作，比如谁在负责哪些工作、具体进展如何以及整个系统如何运转。因为这是一个复杂体系，真正理解政府运作需要实际工作经验。但在这届政府中，我完全没有看到这种情形。

Yeah. I mean, another experience I had and my perception is that within EPA, all of the political appointees as they they came in, what has happened in transitions before, you know, that I've been a part of is you expect, okay, the appointees will come in and be briefed and really take time to get to understand what's happening inside of the agencies, like who's doing the work, what's being done, like, how how how does this work? Because it's it's a complex system. It really takes experience working in in government to understand exactly how how government works. But I I didn't see any of that, in this administration.

我知道我们的高层管理人员、职业管理团队极度渴望能获得向政治任命官员做简报的机会，向他们解释运作机制，展示职业员工的工作价值与奉献精神。或许他们勉强获得过零星机会，但实际操作中，我看到政治任命的团队完全以封闭保密的方式运作，根本不与职业员工接触。这导致我们完全无法获得任何可信的信息——关于我们未来的任何消息。比如在ORD召开全员会议时，我们总期待能终于获得些消息，了解对我们的规划安排，我们的研究将何去何从？

I I know our our higher level managers, our career management staff are just desperate and struggling to get the opportunity to do a briefing to get a chance to speak with the political appointees to to explain to them how things work, to to tell them, you know, show them the value of the the the work and the the the dedication of the career employees. And and maybe minimally, they they were given that chance, but operationally, I I saw the the the political staff coming in and operating completely in a closed off and and secret manner and not engaging at all with the career staff. And then that led to, I think, just no no information that we could trust, you know, coming down, all the way about about our our future. So we would have all hands meetings in, like, in in ORD, and we would expect, oh, we're finally gonna get some news and find out, okay, what's what are the plans for us? So, you know, what's what's what will happen to our our research?

然而根本没有任何消息传达下来，因为政治任命层甚至没有向ORD最高管理层提供任何信息。所以我们始终得不到答案，这种情况持续不断地恶化。我认为直到现在依然如此。

And then no no no news would be coming down because the politicals had had not provided any of that information to even our highest level management in in ORD. So we really just, you know, we we got no answers and and that, you know, just kept continuing on and on. And I think it's it's it's still going on until this point in time.

这听起来太打击士气了。

That sounds so demoralizing.

确实非常艰难。感觉完全缺乏反馈机制或沟通渠道。后来EPA的同事们终于决定：我们必须为此发声采取行动，因为我们意识到机构的工作已偏离使命。于是他们起草了致管理者的联名信表达担忧。虽然我没参与起草，但完全认同信中所有诉求——批评行政当局推行的'五大支柱'方向，反对环境正义项目的裁撤和ORD的削弱决定，最终我也签署了这封信。

Yeah. It was it was really rough. And and it felt like there's really no mechanisms for or there there were no conversations happening. There were no mechanisms for feedback. So I think at at some point, my colleagues at EPA decided, okay.

（注：此处保留原文'Amamus Theater'未译，因可能是特定术语或口误，建议确认）

We need to say something about this. We need to do something because, you know, we we think that the work of our agency is just not being aimed at fulfilling our mission anymore, and and they decided to draft a a letter to to state our concerns to the administrator. So it wasn't part of the drafting of the letter, but I I did agree with with all of its objectives. You're criticizing some of the the the direction that the Amanus Theater was taking us with the the five pillars. You're criticizing the the court of closure and ending of the environmental justice program and the determination of ORD, and, I I signed on to that letter.

签署时是什么感受？是否觉得终于有机会表达 frustrations（挫败感）了？

Yeah. What did it feel like when you signed? Did it feel like you were doing something? Like, you were kind of getting a chance to express some of your frustration?

是的，至少是这样。发言发言再发言。是的。我我认为我们中没有人通过签署这封信就理解到，我们会立即面临被行政停职的威胁，无法继续我们的工作，并接受调查。

Yeah. At minimal. Speaking speak speaking out. Yeah. I I don't think any of us though understood by signing this letter that we were under a threat of immediately being put on administrative leave and and not being able to continue our our work and subject to an investigation.

然后事情就这样发生了？

And that's what happened?

是的，几乎立刻就发生了。我我我甚至不知道那封信已经发表了。就在七月四日假期期间，所有他们能确认签署了那封信的人都被行政停职，并且，你知道，借口是我们因活动正接受调查。

Yeah. That's what happened almost immediately after. I I I didn't even know that the my myself that the letter had been published yet. It was right during the the July 4 holiday that all of us that they were able to identify that signed on to the the letter were put on administrative leave and and, you know, under the pretense that we were under investigation for for our activities.

他们给出的调查理由是什么？

And what was the rationale given for investigating you?

实际上，没有给出任何理由。起初他们甚至没有解释这与信件有关。我的意思是，我们被告知必须靠近电脑，保持可用，你知道，每天的正常工作时间，准备回应如果他们联系。我想几周过去了。我们我们没有听到任何消息，然后我们会收到一封奇怪的邮件，来自这个notify3@eEPA.gov的未署名邮箱，说，好吧。

Really, there was no rationale given. They didn't even explain that it was connected to the letter at first. I mean, we were we were told that we had to stay close to our computers, be available, you know, sort of during our normal working hours every day, be ready to respond if they they reached out. I think we weeks went by. We we didn't hear anything, then we would get a a strange email from an and this notify 3@eEPA.gov email address, unsigned saying, okay.

我要你打开电脑并保持开机一小时。然后另一个请求来了，好吧。这里有个调查。请填写。那时他们在调查中明确问到了那封信。

I want you to turn on your computer and leave it on for an hour. And then another request came, okay. Here's a survey. Please fill out. And that's when they they did ask explicitly about the letter in the survey.

你是否签署了这封信，你知道，使用EPA的机器在EPA的工作时间内等等，然后然后没有回应。一旦我们提交了那些信息回去。但在那时，我已经离开了机构，而我其他剩下的前同事仍然在接受调查。

Did you sign this, you know, using an EPA machine during your EPA working hours and so forth, and and then and no response. Once we submitted that information back. But at at that point, I had left the agency, and my other remaining former colleagues are were were still under investigation.

所以在这段时期，具体时间我不太确定，但斯坦福大学曾联系过你，希望将你的研究——那种关于温室气体排放数据库、碳足迹类型的研究带到斯坦福。你是否觉得自己必须离开环保署？我的意思是，你是否感到受到威胁，工作岌岌可危？

So during this period, and I'm not sure exactly when, but you were approached by Stanford University about bringing your research, this database greenhouse gas emission you know, carbon footprint type of research to Stanford. Did you feel like you had to leave the EPA? I mean, were you feeling under threat, your job under threat?

是的。首先我想声明并澄清一点，《纽约时报》关于我离职的报道有误——这与那封信无关。正如我所说，一旦消息传出，ORD将被解散，而且显然本届政府不会保留或允许任何与气候科学研究相关的内容。USC IO可以追踪许多环境影响，但主要应用还是在气候报告方面。

Yeah. So I and and I I first, I do wanna state and sort of disconnect, I think, what was misportrayed in a New York Times article about my my leaving was that it was not connected to the to the letter. It had become clear, as I said, once the news escaped that ORD would be dismantled and and also the I think with this administration clear that anything related to to climate science research would would not be kept or permitted. USC IO can track lots of environmental impacts. I mean, the the the heavy usage was for the climate reporting.

所以

So

嗯。

Mhmm.

继续开发模型并支持其使用看起来已经不可能了。我不得不面对这个残酷现实——我对此投入很多，这已成为重要的公共资源，我希望它能延续下去。实际上，是Watershed Climate这家私营公司最先在今年早些时候联系我，他们为机构提供软件来报告和追踪温室气体排放，他们提出开放邀约：如果环保署不再支持，他们可以做些什么来推动这项工作和USC IO数据库继续发展。

Being able to continue to to develop the model and support that use looked like it was no longer in the cards. So it I mean, I had faced the tough reality of I've very invested in this. It's just become an important public resource, and and I wanna see it carried forward. So it was actually Watershed Climate who's a a private company operating in the the space of providing software to organizations to report their and track in greenhouse gas emissions that that first approached me earlier in the year and with a with an open offer of, okay, what can they do to to see that this this work and this database USEIO can keep moving forward in in the case that, it no it's no longer supported by EPA.

明白了。据我理解，你做了决定，先是短暂接受了买断方案，最终从环保署辞职。现在你已转到斯坦福大学，并启动了Cornerstone Sustainability Initiative，这是一个进行同类研究的开放获取平台。

Right. Okay. And you made a decision, if I understand right, you did take a buyout briefly and then ended up resigning from the EPA, And you have now moved to Stanford and launched the Cornerstone Sustainability Initiative, which is an open access platform for the same kind of research.

没错。

That's right.

在我们深入讨论之前，我想说，你知道，EPA已经宣布不再更新你创建的这个数据集，这意味着它虽然仍然可用，但会因为不再准确而逐渐失去价值。政府已经终止或重组了研发办公室。自一月份以来，我想已有超过1400名EPA员工通过提前退休或延迟辞职离开了机构。你有留在那里的同事吗？他们告诉过你现在EPA内部的情况吗？

Before we get into that, I wanna say, you know, the EPA has announced it's not gonna update this dataset that you had created any any longer, which means that it's still available, I think, but it'll just become less useful because it won't be accurate anymore. And the administration has terminated or rebranded the office of research and development. Since January, I think more than 1,400 EPA employees have decided to leave the agency through early retirement or deferred resignation. Do you have peers that have stayed? Have they told you anything about what what it's currently like within the EPA?

是的。我有一些同事留下来了。我前ORD的一些同事被调到了机构的其他部门。其他人还在观望，看看ORD的未来会怎样。他们仍然一无所知。

Yes. I've had peers that have stayed. Some of my former ORD colleagues have been reassigned to other offices in the agency. Others are still just hanging out and waiting to see, like, what happens to the to the future of ORD. They still have no idea.

也许他们会作为减员的一部分被解雇。也许他们会被调到另一个职位。

Maybe they'll be fired as part of the reduction in force. Maybe they'll be reassigned into another position.

你在斯坦福的工作进展如何，接手那里的工作还顺利吗？

How is the work at Stanford going, picking your work there?

哦，很棒。Watershed今年早些时候联系了我，我们开始讨论如何在机构之外继续这个模型。他们是一家私营公司，我知道他们在这方面有很高的专业水平和兴趣。但作为一个私营公司，我对他们接管这个模型并保持其开放性和可用性持怀疑态度。就在那时，斯坦福站了出来。

Oh, it's great. So Watershed approached me early in the year, and we started talking about ways to keep the model going outside of the agency. Now they're they're a a private company, and I know they had a high level of expertise and and interest in this. But still, being a private company, I was skeptical of just having them take over this model and being able to keep it open and and available. And that's when Stanford stepped up.

可持续发展学院的Steve Davis博士，他对USCIO和这类模型非常熟悉，所以他站了出来，希望看到USCIO继续下去，并提议在他的机构以及我自己这里托管它。另一方面，我认为我们需要弄清楚的是，Cornerstone可持续发展数据倡议（这是我们组织起来进行工作的项目名称）产出的成果，是否会被视为与EPA时期这个模型和数据产品一样具有合法性和权威性。

Doctor Steve Davis, from the School of Sustainability, He was very familiar with USCIO and and these types of models, so he he stepped up and wanted to see USCIO continue and and offered to to host it at his institution as as well as myself. I think on the other hand, what we have to figure out is, well, will work coming out of the Cornerstone Sustainability Data Initiative, which is what the the the project we're calling, we've organized to produce our work with, will it be considered as legitimate and authoritative as this model and our data products when they came out of EPA?

是的。我们拭目以待。我们已经讨论了很多过去八、九个月里政府内部、环境保护署发生的事情。我在想，你对在这个过程中我们正在失去的东西有什么看法，我称之为沉默、抹去或终结很多科学的这个过程。

Yeah. We'll see. We've talked a lot about what's happened in the last, you know, eight, nine months within the administration, the Environmental Protection Agency. And I'm wondering, you know, what your thoughts are about what we're losing in this process of what what I would call silencing or erasing or ending a lot of the science that our

嗯。

Mhmm.

政府一直以来所做的事情是众所周知的吗？

Government has been doing has been known for?

是的，这有点令人心碎。恐怕事实就是如此，我们正在失去很多。我们的项目非常独特且特别，因为它更具可移植性。外界有足够的兴趣能够在政府之外资助和维护它，而且我们不需要收集那些需要特殊授权法规才能获取的私人数据。

Yeah. It's kind of heartbreaking. I'm I'm afraid that's the the the case that we are losing a lot of it. Our our project is very unique and and special in that it's something that is a bit more portable. There's enough interest outside to to be able to fund and and maintain it and outside of the government, and we we don't require collection of of private data that would require some kind of, statute of special authority to collect.

我们不需要非常昂贵的设备或实验室来进行研究。因此，我们独特之处在于能够将研究带出机构并持续进行。但是，是的，我的许多前同事恐怕没这么幸运。随着他们离开环保署或被调派从事与研究无关的项目，或那些超出他们专业领域的工作，我们正面临巨大的流失，不仅是科学知识，还有机构知识的丧失。这些可能在不到一年的时间里被摧毁，却需要很多年才能重建。这才是令人担忧的部分，因为我的同事们原本在处理许多紧迫的环境问题。

We don't require very expensive equipment or or labs to be able to conduct our research. So we're unique in that we're able to, you know, move our research out of the agency and and keep it going. But, yeah, a a lot of my former colleagues, I don't think will be so lucky. And and as they depart EPA or or or get reassigned to to work on non research, related projects or those outside of their their area of trained expertise, we're we're having a big tremendous drain and and loss of of just scientific and general sort of institutional knowledge that while it can be torn down in less than a year's time, it would take many, many years to to build back. And that's the that's the worrisome part because my colleagues were tackling lots of imminent in environmental issues.

我是说，这些问题与气候有关，也与我们面临的许多其他环境问题相关。当他们无法再在机构内或别处进行这些研究时，我们将无法找到解决这些迫切需要应对的环境问题的方法。

I mean, the you know, related to climate, related to to many other environmental concerns that we're we're facing. And when they're not able to conduct that research anymore either in the agency or or elsewhere, then we're we're not going to be able to find solutions to those those pressing environmental problems that we that we really need to address.

韦斯·英格森是斯坦福大学的研究工程师。非常感谢您加入我们的《气候一号》节目并分享您的故事。

Wes Ingerson is a research engineer at Stanford University. Thank you very much for joining us on Climate One and sharing your story with us.

谢谢邀请我。

Thank you for having me.

接下来，当你无法信任政府提供的数据时会发生什么？科学家们正在寻找替代方式来共享信息。

Coming up, what happens when you can't trust the data from our government? Scientists are finding alternate ways to share information.

这些并非关于某些技术细节的抽象问题，而是直接影响我们生活的现实。

These are not abstract matters about some technical details somewhere. This directly affects our lives.

《气候一号》节目稍后继续为您揭晓。

That's up next when Climate One continues.

每周，我们的播客触达全美50个州及全球各国数以千计关注气候议题的听众。现开放赞助合作，若您有意与《气候一号》携手向听众传递品牌信息或推广产品，请联系Multitude公司，邮箱地址：multitude@multitude.productionsslashads。若您希望赞助特定主题的单期节目，可直接联系我们，邮箱：climateone（one拼写为数字1）@commonwealthclub.org。特朗普政府正系统性抹杀并削减科研经费，尤其是气候科学领域。

Each week, our podcast reaches thousands of climate concerned people in all 50 states and in countries across the world, and now we are accepting sponsorships. So if you're interested in working with Climate One to bring your message or your product to our listeners, contact Multitude at this address, multitude@multitude.productionsslashads. Or if you would prefer to underwrite an episode on a specific topic, you can reach out to us directly via email. That address is climate one, that's one,@commonwealthclub.org. The Trump administration has been engaged in a systemic erasure and defunding of scientific work, particularly climate science.

特朗普领导下的环保署甚至试图废除奥巴马时期的《危害认定》。该认定授权环保署监管汽车尾气排放——这些排放是气候危机的重要推手。为推翻该认定，能源部发布了一份被科学界广泛谴责为误导性、充满虚假信息的气候报告。科学家蕾切尔·克莱图斯（忧思科学家联盟气候与能源政策高级主任）直言不讳。

Trump's EPA has even gone so far as to attempt to repeal the Obama era endangerment finding. That finding allows the EPA to regulate tailpipe emissions from cars and trucks, emissions that are a significant contributor to the climate crisis. To help overturn that finding, the Department of Energy released a climate report scientists have widely condemned as misleading, full of false information. One of those scientists is Rachel Cletus. She's the senior policy director for climate and energy for the Union of Concerned Scientists.

她将这份报告称为骗局。

She calls the report a scam.

关于能源部这份由克里斯·赖特部长授意的报告，首先要说明其出台背景：旨在协助环保署破坏《危害认定》。这项基于科学的认定明确指出，导致气候变化的热捕获排放确实危害人类健康与福祉。根据该认定及最高法院裁定——热捕获排放受《清洁空气法案》管辖——环保署有义务采取措施应对这些危害人类健康的有害排放。如今环保署正推进一项极具破坏性的行动：企图废除《危害认定》，逃避应对气候变化及其人类影响的责任，实质上为化石燃料行业充当马前卒。

The first thing to say about this Department of Energy report that was commissioned by secretary Chris Wright is the context in which it was commissioned, which is to aid and abet EPA's efforts to undermine the endangerment finding. This science based finding established that indeed heat trapping emissions that are driving climate change are harmful to human health and welfare. And that because of this endangerment finding and a supreme court ruling that established that heat trapping emissions are subject to the Clean Air Act, the EPA has an obligation to act to address these emissions, these harmful emissions, because they affect human health. Now the EPA is in the process of a very damaging action where they want to repeal this endangerment finding, evade their responsibility to address climate change and its impacts on people, and essentially do the bidding of the fossil fuel industry.

他们基本上是想放弃自己的权力，这也很耐人寻味。环保署本拥有这项权力，但他们却说，不，我们没有。

They wanna basically give up their own power, which is also interesting. The agency has this authority, and they're saying, no. We don't have it.

没错。根据《清洁空气法案》，环保署有明确的法律义务处理这些有害人类健康的排放问题。但该机构已明确表示，它对保护公众健康或利益不感兴趣，反而更愿意为化石燃料行业服务。在这种情况下，环保署宣布撤销危害认定提案的那天，着实令人震惊。克里斯·赖特部长与环保署署长李·塞尔登站在一起，凭空宣布了这份委托编写的报告。

Exactly. So the EPA has this very clear legal obligation under the Clean Air Act to address these emissions because they're harming human health. But the agency has signaled very clearly that it is not interested in protecting the public health or interest, and rather that it wants to do the bidding of the fossil fuel industry. In this context, it was really shocking the day that the EPA announced its proposal to repeal the endangerment finding. Secretary Chris Wright was standing alongside EPA administrator Lee Seldon and announced out of thin air this report that had been commissioned.

这份报告漏洞百出。首先，能源部长克里斯·赖特秘密委托编写了这份报告。他亲自挑选了五位以气候问题持异议闻名的科学家。其中一个问题是，这份报告正被用来指导联邦政策和机构政策

There are so many things wrong with this report. To start with, DOE secretary Chris Wright commissioned this report secretly. He handpicked a set of five scientists who are known to be climate contrarians. And one of the challenges with that is this report is being used to guide federal policies, agency policies

嗯。

Mhmm.

包括撤销危害认定的提案，这违反了《联邦咨询委员会法案》（FACA）。该法案是国会制定的法律，明确规定设立此类联邦咨询委员会时，首先必须保证成员代表性均衡。委员会本身及其组成、工作内容都必须对公众透明——会议公开，记录可供公众查阅和评议。但这次这些要求无一落实。

Including this proposal to repeal the endangerment finding, and that violates the Federal Advisory Committee Act, FACA. The Federal Advisory Committee Act is an act of congress that establishes some very clear requirements that when these kinds of federal advisory committees are set up, first of all, they have to have balanced representation. There has to be transparency to the public about both the the committee itself and its composition, but also its work. So open meetings, records that are available for the public to look at and comment on. But in this case, none of that happened.

这份草案报告突然公之于众，并被纳入环保署撤销危害认定的提案中。就程序而言，这是重大失误。忧思科学家联盟与环境保卫基金已就此违反《联邦咨询委员会法案》的行为提起了诉讼。

This draft report was just sprung on the public and incorporated into the EPA's repeal of the endangerment finding. So on process, this is a big process fail. And the Union of Concerned Scientists together with the Environmental Defense Fund have actually filed a lawsuit because of this violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

而且报告内容非常可疑，对吧？

And the report's content is very specious. Right?

没错。这就是这份报告存在的第二个严重问题。由于它是由一群精心挑选的气候怀疑论者编撰的，报告充斥着虚假信息、经过筛选的数据。在某些情况下，甚至直接歪曲多位科学家的研究成果，故意曲解其含义。令人震惊的是，报告发布不到一天，就有科学家发现自己的研究被扭曲，结论与实际情况完全相反。

Exactly. So that's the second huge problem with this report. Because it was created by a set of handpicked climate contrarians, it is full of disinformation, cherry picked data. In some cases, just outright lies where the research of several scientists has been deliberately misinterpreted. And it it's shocking because, you know, within a day of the report being published, there were scientists looking at their own work where their work had been twisted to say the opposite of what their findings actually were.

哇。居然还是一份联邦政府报告。

Wow. In a federal report, no less.

是的。更令人担忧的是，现在这份报告获得了联邦政府的背书。要知道，美国联邦政府最高层现在正式将气候否认和气候虚假信息作为官方立场。这不仅关乎科学真相，更关乎它如何影响人们的生活，这才是最令人不安的。

Yeah. And it's it's alarming that this has now got the federal government's backing. You know, the US federal government from the highest levels now is officially adopting climate denial and climate disinformation as its position. That's alarming not just because of it's about the science. It's about the way it affects people's lives.

这些虚假信息试图淡化气候变化对人类健康、地球生态以及经济成本的真实危害——这些危害如今已成现实。放眼全国乃至全球，极端热浪、洪水泛滥、风暴加剧以及灾难性山火频发，都是无法否认的事实。

The disinformation is about how it's impacting people's health, planetary health, the cost of climate change. It's essentially trying to downplay the really harmful impacts of climate change, which now are a reality. You look around the country and the world, and you see these extreme heat waves. You see the flooding, the intensified storms, and catastrophic wildfires. There's just no denying it.

自报告发布以来，已有数百名科学家提交评论驳斥其内容。忧思科学家联盟也发表了反对意见，甚至国家安全领域的权威人士也纷纷提出质疑。

Since that report has come out, there have been hundreds of scientists who have filed comments debunking this report. The Union of Concerned Scientists has filed comments as well. There are national security leaders who filed comments.

我正想提到这点。特别值得关注的是，正如你所说，这份报告不仅因包含大量错误信息并扭曲科学发现而遭到科学界普遍批评和拒绝，更有超过20位国家安全领域领袖强烈谴责，他们称该报告'在应对气候变化带来的国家安全风险方面完全不合格'。我认为有必要引用这句话，因为这些影响已经切实存在。

I was gonna get to that. I think that's especially interesting. So, yeah, this was roundly criticized and rejected by the scientific community for all the reasons you mentioned that it just incorporates so much misinformation and it twists scientific findings. But also, as you said, this group of more than 20 national security leaders also heavily criticized it, and they called it, quote, wholly inadequate in addressing the national security risks posed by climate change. And I think that's worth citing because these impacts are here.

它们正在当下发生。这不仅仅是能源来源的问题，更是关乎我们亲眼目睹的对生命和经济造成的真实威胁。

They're happening now. And it's not just about where the energy is coming from. It's about what is happening and the the very real risks to life and the economy that we're seeing.

是的。我的意思是，包括美国国家气候评估、政府间气候变化专门委员会（IPCC）的评估报告在内的众多科学评估已经充分记录了这一点。这些报告由全球和美国数千名科学家共同编写，其依据是更多科学家的基础文献，具有很高的可信度。

Yes. I mean, this has been well documented by numerous scientific assessments, including the US National Climate Assessments, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC's assessment reports. And these are reports prepared by thousands of scientists around the world and in The United States. These are reports that depend on underlying literature from thousands more scientists. These are credible.

这些报告经历了严格的同行评审，而且是多轮评审。相比之下，那份能源部的虚假报告只是由精心挑选的气候怀疑论者匆忙秘密拼凑而成，甚至没有经过最基本的可信科学同行评审。但由于现在得到美国政府的支持，真正的危险在于它将被政策制定采纳，这正是其明确意图——报告作者提出了政策建议，而能源部长赖特在前言中也明确表达了委托撰写该报告的意图。

They've gone through rigorous peer review, multiple rounds of it. And contrast that with the sham DOE report that was just hastily put together in secret by handpicked climate contrarians and hasn't even gone through the most rudimentary sort of credible scientific peer review. But because it is now being supported by the US government, the real danger here is that it will start to get adopted in policy making, and that's the very clear intent. Both in the report itself, the authors offer recommendations for policies. And in the forward to the report, secretary Wright is is very clear about the intent in commissioning this report.

因此，这不仅对科学家，对所有将受气候变化影响的人——也就是我们所有人——都是关键时刻。这些不同评论都指出，在当前气候危机日益恶化的情况下，无所作为并破坏气候政策和清洁能源政策（正如本届政府全面实施的那样）极其危险，这将使人们面临更大风险。

So it's a really crucial moment, not just for scientists, but for everybody who is going to be affected by climate change, which is all of us. And what all of these different comments are pointing out is that given the current worsening climate crisis, it is truly dangerous to do nothing and to undermine climate policies and clean energy policies, which is what this administration is doing across the board. And it will put people in greater danger.

嗯。如你所言，忧思科学家联盟和环境保护基金会已就该报告的编撰方式提起诉讼——这个由气候怀疑论者组成的工作组已被解散。但你们的诉讼仍在进行，最近有新进展。能否简要说明当前进展？

Mhmm. As you mentioned, the Union of Concerned Scientists and Environmental Defense Fund have filed a lawsuit over the way this report was pulled together, the climate working group that was appointed of climate skeptics. That group was disbanded. However, your lawsuit stands, and there was an update on that recently. Can you just fill us in on where where that stands?

好的。首先声明我不是法律专家，诉讼目前正在进行中。但关键是，仅仅解散工作组并不能消除报告造成的危害，因为报告仍在流传。美国政府宣称这是官方文件，可在多种场合使用。此外，我们需要看到相关记录——他们违反了《联邦咨询委员会法》，意味着整个过程缺乏透明度。公众有权知道这份报告的来龙去脉，包括能源部与环保署之间的沟通细节，尤其是环保署试图利用该报告推翻危害认定的过程。所有这些都必须公之于众。

Yeah. So I I should start by saying I'm I'm not a legal expert, and this lawsuit is in in the works right now. But the big picture here is that simply disbanding the climate working group doesn't get away with the harm that the report causes because the report is still out there. You know, the US government is is saying this is an official US government document, and it can be used in lots of other settings. The other piece of this, of course, is that we need to see the records.

他们违反了《联邦咨询委员会法》，这意味着整个流程缺乏透明度。公众有权知道这份报告是如何产生的——能源部与环保署之间有何沟通？当环保署试图利用该报告推翻危害认定时发生了什么？所有这些都需要曝光在阳光下。

They have violated FACA, and that means that there was a lack of transparency around the entire process. And the public has a right to know how did this report come about. What was the communication between DOE and the EPA as the EPA was seeking to use this report to reveal the endangerment finding. All of this needs to be brought out in the light.

不幸的是，这只是特朗普政府众多行动中的一个例子。你和几位同事最近发布了题为《受围攻的科学与民主》的报告，记录了特朗普政府六个月的破坏性行动。报告内容详实，还包含许多图表帮助人们理解事态严重性。我想请你解读其中几个行动的重要意义。

So this is just one, unfortunately, of many examples of the actions we're seeing by the Trump administration. You and several others published a recent report called Science and Democracy Under Siege, documenting six months of the Trump administration's destructive actions. There's a lot in this report. You also have a lot of charts that kind of help people get a picture of what's at stake. So I would just wanna walk through a couple of these and have you explain the significance of these actions.

那么我们来谈谈人员裁减问题，因为我知道这对许多机构来说意义重大。

So let's talk about the the staff cuts because I know that's really meaningful in a in a lot of these agencies.

自特朗普政府任期开始以来，我们目睹了对联邦政府科学、专业知识、人员编制和预算的极端打击。忧思科学家联盟记录了特朗普政府前六个月发起的这些攻击，并在报告发布后持续更新。目前已有近500起针对联邦政府各部门的攻击记录，这些攻击尤其针对气候领域，但也广泛涉及卫生、教育等整个科学体系。

So, since the Trump administration's term started, we've seen an extraordinary assault on federal government science, expertise, staffing, budgets. And the Union of Concerned Scientists documented six months the first six months of these attacks from the Trump administration. And we've continued to update since we released that report. There've been hundreds of attacks, close to 500 now, across federal government agencies tracking all these different kinds of attacks. And they have been particularly targeted at climate, but very broadly on many other aspects, including health, education, and the entire scientific apparatus.

我们重点关注的问题之一是专业人才的空心化，特别是各机构的科学专家和资深员工被替换，转而将科学政治化，并任命那些公开宣称要破坏机构使命的领导人。例如环保署似乎竭尽全力增加排放和污染，而非保护公众健康。我们追踪的机构包括环保署和国家海洋与大气管理局，后者是联邦政府收集大量数据以了解地球（包括气候变化影响）的重要科学机构。

And one of the things that we have been focused on is the hollowing out of expertise, especially scientific expertise and senior experienced staff at various agencies and the replacement by politicizing science and installing leaders in agencies who have been very outspoken of actually wanting to undermine the very mission of the agency. And that includes, for example, the Environmental Protection Agency that seems hell bent on doing everything it can to increase emissions, increase pollution rather than protect public health. Some of the agencies we've been tracking include the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which is one of the key scientific, bodies in the federal government that helps collect an enormous amount of data that helps us understand our planet, including how climate change is affecting our planet.

还包括每日天气预报。

Including daily weather forecasts too.

是的。国家海洋与大气管理局下属的国家气象局提供全国各地的天气预报数据，无论是通过苹果手表还是电视获取，其底层都依赖这些免费公开的联邦数据。但该机构人员被大幅削减，预算削减威胁严重阻碍国家气象局的工作能力。我们看到各地办事处关键岗位长期空缺，当重大极端天气灾害来临时，这将导致应急管理者和公众无法及时获取关键信息，极其危险。

Yes. Including the, NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, includes the National Weather Service, which if you get your weather anywhere in this country, whether it's from your Apple Watch or on TV, underlying that is that free publicly accessible federal government data from the National Weather Service. And they have decimated staffing at the agency, threatened budget cuts that would really impede the agency's the National Weather Service's ability to do its work. And one of the things we've seen is staffing cuts at the their offices around the country that have kept key positions unfilled. Now when you have a major extreme weather disaster coming, that can be really dangerous because then you don't have that quick flow of information to the right people who need it, emergency managers, the general public, etcetera.

这些机构员工在极端困难条件下做出了非凡贡献。他们不是官僚，而是真正的公共服务者。看到政府用激烈甚至暴力的言辞攻击他们，实在令人震惊。在医疗领域，我们现在的政府正蓄意破坏卫生与公众服务部、疾控中心等机构基于科学的信息发布。

These agencies and their staff are doing extraordinary work under very difficult circumstances. And, you know, these are not bureaucracies. These are people who are actually doing public service. And to see the administration attack them with a kind of rhetoric that's really heated and even violent is is is just it's it's stunning to see. You know, when it comes to health care, we now have a government that is deliberately undermining science based information coming out of health and human services and CDC, etcetera.

我们看到科学家们冒着巨大风险勇敢保护公众。例如联邦应急管理局多名员工在卡特里娜飓风二十周年纪念时发表公开信，表示他们非常担心该机构的现状会加剧灾难风险——若再遭遇类似飓风，后果可能更致命。这类情况正在各部门上演，而当前挑战在于这些攻击来得又快又猛。

And you can see scientists valiantly trying to protect the public, speaking out at great risk to themselves. We had, for example, a number of staffers at the Federal Emergency Management Agency write an open letter around the anniversary of the twentieth anniversary of commemorating hurricane Katrina. They sent us letters saying essentially that they were so worried about what was happening to the Federal Emergency Management Agency that they felt that it put us at heightened risk that should a storm like that come, it could be even more dangerous. This is the kind of thing we're seeing across the board. And part of the challenge in this moment is that these attacks are so fast and furious.

这些现象正在各个领域发生。但我们绝不能对此习以为常。密切关注并理解它如何影响我们的日常生活至关重要。嗯。

They're happening on all fronts. But we should never normalize what's happening here. It's really important to pay attention and understand how it's affecting all of our daily lives. Mhmm.

没错。正因如此，像你们这样记录我们目睹的所有变化才显得尤为重要。正如我所说，这份报告涉及诸多内容，但我想再强调几点。我们看到各类研究和常规资助金遭到大幅削减，许多政府网站上的数据和信息被彻底删除，公众再也无法获取这些资源。

Right. And hence the importance of documenting as you all are doing all these changes that we're seeing. There's there's many things, as I said, in this report, but I wanna just highlight a couple more. We're seeing big cuts to grants that are going to all kinds of research and regular grant funding. We're seeing a lot of actual erasure and deletion of government websites where we've been keeping all of this data and information just going away and not being available to the public.

我想特别提一下联邦独立科学委员会的大规模解散。这听起来可能很官僚主义，但对民众影响极其重大。能否解释下这意味着什么？并举例说明几个已被解散的独立咨询委员会？

And one I wanna spend just a moment on is disbanding a lot of federal independent science committees. And I think this is one that can sound really bureaucratic, but is also very, very important for people. So can you help me understand what that means and maybe cite a couple examples that we've seen of these disbanding of an independent advisory boards?

好的。这些联邦咨询委员会是政策制定汲取前沿科学的重要渠道，旨在为关乎民生的政策提供无党派专业意见。比如疫苗安全与接种规程咨询委员会，FEMA设立的灾害应对指导委员会，EPA下设的有害污染物标准制定委员会等。

Yeah. So one of the really important examples of how policymaking can be informed by the best available science is through these federal advisory committees, which are meant to provide nonpartisan expertise on policy matters that directly affect our lives in many different ways. And some of the ways this happens is, for example, through advisory committees around vaccine safety and vaccine protocols. There have been advisory committees that FEMA has set up around guiding disaster response. There have been committees set up at the EPA around informing pollution standards for harmful pollutants.

这类委员会确保联邦政策始终遵循科学前沿。仅此而已——无关党派立场，不受时间限制，只为让事实指引重大决策。

And these kinds of advisory committees help make sure that our federal government policies are guided by the best available science. That's it. There's no partisan endeavor here. There's no time on the scale. This is about making sure that facts help guide important decisions.

然而当前政府却将科学政治化，预先设定结论，为污染企业、亿万富翁和化石燃料公司谋利。他们要么直接解散这些委员会，要么安插与执政理念一致的成员取代独立专家，这直接影响我们每个人。无论是疫苗还是有毒化学品，我们都希望政府政策建立在可靠科学基础上。

And instead, we have a government that wants to politicize science, has already predetermined outcomes. It wants to put its thumb on the scale in favor of polluters, billionaires, fossil fuel companies. And it's either dismantling many of these committees and doing away with them entirely, or it's reconstituting them with members who align with the administration's way of thinking rather than independent credible expertise, and that's that affects all of us. So whether it's vaccines or toxic chemicals, we wanna know that our government's policies are being guided by good science.

这一切会如何影响公众对CDC、FDA这些家喻户晓的国家机构的信任？虽然EPA可能没那么知名，但许多机构缩写早已深入人心，因为民众了解它们的职能。

And what does all of this do to public faith in these national agencies and institutions that are household words? I mean, the CDC, the FDA, the you know, maybe not so much the EPA, but a lot of these acronyms are commonplace because people know what these agencies do.

是的。要知道，在一个拥挤的环境中，每个人都忙于日常生活的琐事，你希望相信联邦政府在为你着想，而不是蓄意损害你的福祉，屈从于大财团和污染行业的利益。你我未必具备追踪每一种化学品或理解新疫苗问世背后复杂因素的专业知识。但我们希望联邦政府任用合适的人才，他们可信可靠，具备专业能力，真正为我们着想。而清除这类独立可信的科学建议，代之以充满偏见、不可信的科学，不仅直接有害，长期更会侵蚀公众对事实的信任。

Yeah. You know, in a very crowded environment where everyone obviously is focused on their daily life concerns, you want to trust that your federal government is looking out for you, that they're not deliberately undermining your well-being and being beholden to big money and polluting interests. You and I don't have the expertise necessarily to track every single chemical or understand all of the complicated factors that might be behind a new vaccine coming to being made available to the public. But we wanna trust that our federal government has the right people in place with the right expertise who are trusted, credible, and are looking out for us. And that's why getting rid of this kind of independent credible scientific advice and replacing it with very biased, noncredible science is directly harmful, but over time erodes the public's trust and facts.

环顾四周，你不知该相信什么，因为目睹自己的政府散播虚假信息。当公众失去事实依据，危险便无处不在。我反复强调'危险'一词，因为这绝非关于某些技术细节的抽象议题——它直接影响我们的生活。我们正目睹一个日益专制的政府试图用宣传替代事实。

You look around, and you don't know what to believe anymore because you're seeing your own government spew disinformation. And when the general public doesn't have that factual basis, that gets dangerous all around. And I'm using the word danger many times because I I I can't emphasize enough how these are not abstract matters about some technical details somewhere. This directly affects our lives. And we're seeing an increasingly authoritarian government here that is trying to replace facts with propaganda.

这样的环境意味着人们不知道该信任谁、向谁求助。

And that kind of an environment means that people don't know whom to turn to to trust.

我们讨论了这场真正的危机——这些机构被削弱、解散乃至全面瓦解的过程。但科学家们不会默默退场。对吧？现在有许多应对行动，人们主动掌握数据和研究主导权。我想花几分钟谈谈你们组织的行动，以及整个科学界正在采取的应对措施。

So we've talked about this real crisis, this erosion cutting, disbanding, you know, dismantling of of all of this. And scientists are not going quietly into the darkness. Right? There's a lot of efforts to respond, to activate, to take charge of some of this data or research themselves. So I wanna spend a few minutes talking about that and what your group is doing, but what also you're seeing just across the sort of scientific field for what people are doing to respond.

是的。这是个非凡的时刻：我们既看到科学界面临的巨大风险，也见证着鼓舞人心的努力。科学家们认清了这个时刻的本质——这不仅是对个人或机构的攻击，更是对我们民主制度中事实根基的冲击。

Yeah. I think it's been an extraordinary moment where we've both seen incredible, solved great risks that the scientific community is facing, and yet so much inspirational work that's happening. Scientists are seeing this moment for what it is. It's it's not just a personal attack or an attack on institutions. This is just an attack on the fundamental idea of facts in our democracy.

他们不再袖手旁观，而是明确展示科学对民众生活的价值，并竭尽全力寻找保存科学的方法。如果联邦政府不守护优质科学，人们就试图建立替代机制，为更美好的未来保存火种。当然，这些替代机制永远无法完全取代联邦政府的权力、覆盖范围、公众透明度及预算。例如，由于多个气候相关网站被关闭，前NOAA员工等人士正通过climate.us平台合作确保气候数据持续在线。

And they're coming off the sidelines. They're making very clear the value of that science in people's lives and doing everything they can to find ways to preserve it. If the federal government is not going to safeguard good science, then people are trying to build alternate structures where it can be preserved in the hope for a better day. Now, of course, these alternate structures can never fully replace the power of the federal government, its reach, its transparency to the public, its budget. But for example, because we've seen various climate related sites go down, there is now an effort called climate.us where several former NOAA staffers and others have come together to try to make sure that that climate data remains online.

这包括特朗普政府已下线的国家气候评估等资料——这些由纳税人资助的科学资源正被剥夺公众访问权。因此其他人挺身而出确保其可用性。另一项努力是当政府发布虚假信息时迅速用事实反击。比如那份虚假的能源部报告出台后，多个团体立即驳斥，包括国家科学院正加速发布的报告，针对危害性认定公示期，阐明气候变化与吸热排放对人类健康的影响。

This includes things like the national climate assessments, which the Trump administration has taken offline. These are taxpayer funded scientific resources that they are removing from public access. So others are stepping up to make sure that's still available. The other things that people are trying to do is make sure that when the government puts out this information, they very quickly come back with the facts. So when that sham do DOE report came out, there have been multiple efforts to push back, including a report that the National Academies of Sciences is putting out on an expedited basis because of the common period for the endangerment finding to establish the facts on how climate change and heat trapping emissions affect human health.

因此需要迅速公布事实真相，我们看到公共卫生专家在疫苗问题上也在努力这样做。许多州的公共卫生专家正试图在州一级加强工作，以弥补我们联邦政府似乎正在放弃的职责。我认为，我们看到来自联邦紧急事务管理局、环境保护署员工等机构的多封公开异议信，这些人在冒着极大的个人风险。他们尽可能署上真名，明确陈述了他们所看到的风险，以及为了公共利益必须扭转某些做法的必要性。最后，当然，联邦政府还在攻击私营机构。

So getting the facts out there very quickly, and we're seeing public health experts trying to do this on vaccines as well. A number of states where public health experts are trying to reinforce at the state level what our federal government seems to be giving up. And I think that a number of these open letters of descent that we've seen out there, like from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, from employees at the Environmental Protection Agency, and others, again, at extraordinary risk to themselves. They are they're putting their names on these letters when they can and stating very clearly what they see as the risks here and the public interest in making sure that some of these things are reversed. And then finally, of course, the federal government is attacking private institutions as well.

他们正在撤回科研资助。他们正在摧毁美国数十年来建立的卓越科研体系。来自教育机构和研究机构的科学家们纷纷发声，解释这种情况造成的损失。因此，科学实践本身已成为一种抵抗形式——不仅揭露危害，更宣告'我们仍将坚持做好科学，因为这依然重要。事实依然重要'。

They're pulling back scientific grants. They are decimating what is an extraordinary scientific enterprise built up over decades in The United States. And there are two scientists are speaking up from educational institutions, from research institutions to explain what is being lost when this happens. So the practice the practice of science itself has become a form of resistance, not just calling out the harm, but saying, and we will still keep doing good science because it still matters. Facts still matter.

是的。作为一名科学家，过去九个月目睹自己的领域遭受如此有针对性的诋毁和迫害，这种感受是怎样的？

Yeah. What has it felt like as a scientist yourself to experience this the last nine months of seeing your fields, frankly, persecuted, you know, discredited in in such a targeted way.

有些早晨醒来，我简直难以置信这一切正在发生。因为这些攻击来得如此迅猛、激烈且充满人身攻击。就我最密切研究的气候变化问题而言，我们真的没有时间可以浪费。气候危机正在以令人恐惧的速度加剧，这实在令人心碎。

Some days I wake up and I think, can this really be happening? Because the attacks have been so fast and furious and personal in so many ways. And I think, you know, for the issue that I work on most closely, which is climate change, we really have no time to waste. The climate crisis is accelerating in such terrifying ways. And it just it's heartbreaking.

这种时间浪费让人愤怒至极。我认为这是不可原谅的。我不知道我们该如何向子孙后代解释——在这个本可以采取行动的时刻，我们本可以部署更多清洁能源，本可以实现化石燃料转型，却把时间浪费在政府散播的谎言和虚假信息上。

It it just makes one so angry that we're wasting time in this way. And I just think it's unforgivable. I I I don't know how we can justify this to future generations that we had a moment where we could actually act. We could deploy more clean energy. We could actually transition away from fossil fuels, and we wasted our time with these lies and disinformation from our own government.

但这也极具激励性，因为我并非孤军奋战。我知道有许多像我这样的人，他们看清了这个时刻，明白我们正被召唤挺身而出。即使政府持续让我们失望，此刻我们仍被呼唤去做正确的事。

But it's also very galvanizing because I'm not alone. I know there are many, many people like me who look at this moment and understand that we are being called to step up. We we are being called to do what's right in this moment even as our government continues to fail us.

瑞秋·克莱提斯是忧思科学家联盟气候与能源高级政策主任。非常感谢你今天与我们分享这些见解。

Rachel Kletis is senior policy director for climate and energy at the Union of Concerned Scientists. Thank you so much for sharing all this with us today.

谢谢你，阿里安娜。非常感谢你的邀请。

Thank you, Ariana. Thank you so much for having me.

针对美国环保署试图推翻危害性认定的直接反驳，美国国家科学院刚刚发布了一份报告，审查了迄今为止最有力的证据，表明二氧化碳和甲烷等导致地球变暖的温室气体正在威胁人类健康。

In a direct rebuttal to the EPA's effort to overturn the endangerment finding, the National Academies of Science just published a report reviewing the strongest evidence to date that planet warming greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane are threatening human health.

以上就是我们今天的节目。感谢收听。你可以通过订阅我们的新闻简报了解我们团队正在阅读的内容。请访问climate1.org注册，然后吃块巧克力犒劳自己吧，这是你应得的。

And that's our show. Thanks for listening. You can see what our team is reading by subscribing to our newsletter. Sign up at climate1.org, and then eat a piece of chocolate. You deserve it.

《气候一号》是联邦俱乐部的制作节目。我们的团队成员包括格雷格·道尔顿、布拉德·马什兰、珍妮·帕克、奥斯汀·科隆、梅根·巴西利亚、库沙·纳维达尔和雷切尔·莱西。主题音乐由乔治·杨创作。我是阿里安娜·布罗修斯。

Climate One is a production of the Commonwealth Club. Our team includes Greg Dalton, Brad Marshland, Jenny Park, Austin Colon, Megan Basilia, Kusha Navidar, and Rachel Lacey. Our theme music is by George Young. I'm Ariana Brosius.