近來(lái)科技快速進(jìn)步，新的太陽(yáng)能電池以及核反應(yīng)堆設(shè)計(jì)方案等接連出現(xiàn)，已經(jīng)改變了傳統(tǒng)環(huán)保主義的觀念。

上周一，在加州卡爾斯巴德市召開的財(cái)富能源頭腦風(fēng)暴大會(huì)上，幾位頂尖的能源和商界領(lǐng)袖在一場(chǎng)論壇里談到這個(gè)話題。

長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)，傳統(tǒng)環(huán)保主義者一直呼吁減少能源和水資源消費(fèi)，以更好地保護(hù)全球資源。然而，一些現(xiàn)代環(huán)保主義者認(rèn)為，技術(shù)已經(jīng)提高人類采集資源的效率，降低資源消費(fèi)的必要性有所下降，特別是能源消費(fèi)。

能源研究機(jī)構(gòu)the Breakthrough Institute聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人邁克爾?謝倫伯格指出，限制能源消費(fèi)的提法源于20世紀(jì)70年代，已經(jīng)不太適應(yīng)當(dāng)今時(shí)代。謝倫伯格非常支持重新啟用核能，他相信核能安全性已經(jīng)夠高，可以擴(kuò)大應(yīng)用范圍而且能充分滿足全世界的能源需求。

謝倫伯格在本次大會(huì)上介紹了自己新成立的研究和政策機(jī)構(gòu)Environmental Progress，工作內(nèi)容包括倡議不要關(guān)停核電站，重新啟用已關(guān)閉的核反應(yīng)堆，以及全球范圍推動(dòng)建設(shè)新核電站。

Environmental Progress在網(wǎng)站上還表示，希望提高貧窮國(guó)家電力消費(fèi)水平，因?yàn)樵谀承┺r(nóng)村地區(qū)，許多人“仍將木頭和動(dòng)物糞便作為主要能源”。

謝倫伯格計(jì)劃本周四赴白宮討論維持核電站運(yùn)行的問(wèn)題。最近，他聯(lián)合他人致信美國(guó)總統(tǒng)奧巴馬，解釋為什么他和其他科學(xué)家以及自然資源環(huán)保者認(rèn)為，關(guān)停核電站不利于環(huán)保工作。

謝倫伯格在信中指出，核電站關(guān)閉后，取而代之的往往是天然氣發(fā)電廠，結(jié)果“多出的碳排放量相當(dāng)于路上多了300萬(wàn)輛汽車”。在他看來(lái)，雖然核能受到諸多批評(píng)，但仍是最廉價(jià)、最高效的能源。

舉例來(lái)說(shuō)，環(huán)保組織Sierra Club反對(duì)核能的理由是核能很危險(xiǎn)，而且產(chǎn)生了太多的核廢料。但謝倫伯格相信，比起太陽(yáng)能，核能仍是更好的可替代能源，如果太陽(yáng)能及電池技術(shù)持續(xù)進(jìn)步而且更加廉價(jià)，他或許會(huì)改變態(tài)度。

謝倫伯格說(shuō)：“如果能研究出比核能便宜的超級(jí)太陽(yáng)能和電池，我就支持你們。”（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：Charlie

審校：夏林

Recent and rapid advancements in technology, including new batteries for storing solar energy and new nuclear reactor designs, have changed the notion of traditional environmentalism.

That’s one of the themes discussed during a panel of leading energy and business experts speaking atFortune’s Brainstorm E conference held in Carlsbad, Calif. on Monday.

Traditional environmentalists have long advocated the need to reduce energy and water consumption to better preserve the world’s resources. But some modern environmentalists argue that technology has enabled mankind to gather resources more efficiently than before, which offsets some of the need to cut back on the amount of resources they consume, specifically energy.

Michael Shellenberger, who co-founded the energy research group the Breakthrough Institute, explained that the idea of limiting energy consumption comes from the 1970s and is less relevant in the today’s era. In particular, Shellenberger is interested in the reviving nuclear power, which he believes is safe enough to be used on a larger scale and can generate enough energy to keep the world satiated.

Shellenberger announced his new research and policy group, Environmental Progress, during Brainstorm E. Part of his new group’s agenda includes advocating to stop nuclear plants from closing, reopen closed nuclear plants, and increase the number of nuclear plants being developed throughout the world.

Environmental Progress also wants to see more electricity being used in poor nations, because in some rural areas, many people “still rely on wood and dung as their primary energy,” according to the group’s website.

Shellenberger plans to visit the White House on Thursday to talk about keeping nuclear plants operating. Recently, he co-wrote a letter to President Obama about why he and other scientists and conservationists believe that closing nuclear plants undermines the president’s environmental work.

In the letter, Shellenberger argued that when nuclear plants close, they are often replaced with natural gas-fueled power plants that result in “additional carbon emissions equivalent to putting three million new cars on the road.” In his view, nuclear energy is the cheapest and most efficient means of energy available, although the technology has many critics.

The environmental organization Sierra Club, for example, is opposed to nuclear power, which the group believes is dangerous and creates too much nuclear waste. Still, Shellenberger believes that for now, nuclear power is a better alternative than solar power, although if solar and battery technology continue to advance and get cheaper, he may change his tune.

“If we have amazing solar and batteries that are cheaper than nuclear I’ll be right with you,” Shellenberger said.