文章 Articles

姜克隽:虚假的“低碳城市”

姜克隽接受刘鉴强采访时表示,中国现在所谓的低碳城市大部分是假的。真正的低碳城市将是中国未来的竞争力。国际谈判的游戏该结束了,以后应该是各国低碳技术的竞争。

Article image

中国发改委能源研究所研究员姜克隽是中国最早研究低碳城市的学者之一,他与同事正为中国的沈阳市规划低碳城市建设。在联合国气候谈判天津会议期间,中外对话副总编刘鉴强采访了他。

刘鉴强:中国很多城市号称在建“低碳城市”,“低碳”似乎成为最时髦的词。你觉得那些是真正的低碳城市吗?

姜克隽:那些所谓的“低碳城市”,实际是高碳城市。你想,中国城市的人均碳排放是西方城市的两倍以上,这怎么叫低碳城市?

刘鉴强:中国城市人均碳排放为什么这么高?

姜克隽:因为发达国家城市的主要功能是居住,碳排放主要是建筑与交通两项。而中国城市中有大量的工业,工业碳排放大,而生活耗能并不多。

中国在战略上鼓励建设低碳城市是对的,但很多城市方法不对,大家一窝蜂地去建“低碳城市”,结果造成了灾难。

比如我们所在的这个梅江会展中心,看起来多么现代,多么豪华,谈判会议就放这里。但参会者要走到马路对面,就很麻烦。这条宽阔的路既让人不方便,又浪费土地!这就是中国人眼里的现代化,其实是小农眼里的现代化。

我们现在的城市建设,可以说是全面错误。比如说北京,从建筑,到道路,再到城市功能设计,都不好。我们的建筑建得空旷,空间利用率低。从90年代到2005年左右,北京的策略是鼓励机动车发展。所谓“发展交通”,就是提高机动车的运行速度,比如时速从14公里提高到15公里。另一个指标就是道路面积,一年提高了多少道路面积,成为政绩指标。越这样做,自行车和步行区域就越少。但北京的领导人还说,车量大是现代化的表现。北京曾经把老城墙扒掉,后来又想把798艺术区给拆掉,我们在犯第二次错误。但这代表了大部分中国人的认识。

刘鉴强:那么北京的邻居城市廊坊呢?曾有环保机构组织媒体去报道这个“低碳城市”。

姜克隽:那也不是真的。廊坊在争“环保模范城市”,但它采取什么办法呢?就是视觉上的“漂亮”和“现代化”。尽管廊坊只有30万城市人口,它的几条马路,不比北京的长安街窄。它的城市绿化也有很多高碳的草地。我们一直在跟环保部的同事说,赶快修改他们申请模范城市的指标,让它和低碳指标结合到一起,否则的话,大家看起来都“环保”,但都高碳。咱们不能怪廊坊或其他城市,它们确实是按环保部的指标来的,但现在“低碳城市”流行,于是它一转身就把自己的“环保城市”叫成“低碳城市”。廊坊城市很小,市民骑自行车从家门口到办公室一般不超过十分钟,开车也就三四分钟,但廊坊市的机动车拥有率高于北京。为什么?因为停车不要钱,路又很宽阔。

问题最要命的是,中国未来将有一半城市人口生活在此类城市,如果他们都学北京,我们的低碳城市就完了。

刘鉴强:大家为什么建设“低碳城市”,反而搞成了“高碳城市”呢?

姜克隽:因为没人知道什么是“低碳城市”,大部分的城市在靠自己的想象建设所谓“低碳城市”,甚至很多研究人员也不能理解低碳。

刘鉴强:难道中国就没有一个城市在建设真正的“低碳城市”吗?

姜克隽:有。沈阳就是在全面规划低碳城市。我和同事们帮他们全面设计,从总体产业结构,到建筑、交通、土地利用、居民生活。第一个指标是设计良好的自行车和行人道占道路比例,最好的停车位给自行车和公交车。还有公交占出行量的比例、公交专用道的比例、公交车的速度。地铁的建设取决于当地政府的财政能力,这个难度不大。还有建绿色出租车队。沈阳有汽车制造厂,因此有这样的条件。沈阳还采用更高的能效标准,比如在沈阳销售的机动车要高于全国节能标准,建筑要采用全国最高的75%节能建筑。

刘鉴强:政府有那么多钱做低碳工程吗?

姜克隽:我们也为沈阳政府算过帐,比如哪些要政府出钱,哪些不出钱,比如采用75%节能标准,这可以由开发商出钱。其他的支出,比如交通,他们也付得起,政府一年收入500多亿元,为建设低碳城市拿出十几亿,还是可以承受的。

刘鉴强:为什么沈阳这么积极建低碳城市?他们有什么动力?

姜克隽:有两位政治局常委曾在辽宁工作过,他们希望沈阳能做出好的试验。其中一位领导人曾访问日本,日本的低碳城市给他留下了非常深刻的印象,因此他要求沈阳建设低碳城市。

刘鉴强:除了上级的要求,还有什么动力,令很多官员至少在口头上大力建设“低碳城市”?

姜克隽:各地官员相互进行GDP的竞争,你今年增长12%,我就要13%,不能输给你,彼此累得要命。而且中国GDP已快速发展了30年,以后机会不多了。比如首钢搬出北京了,北京的GDP增长再从哪里来?在传统指标方面,自己要是没竞争力,就需要提出新的政绩指标,比如“宜居城市”、“低碳城市”。而且各地政府官员都是聪明的,他们也要与世界潮流一致,与中央政府的目标一致。

刘鉴强:城市走低碳道路,比如限制高耗能工业,会不会减少其经济上的竞争力?

姜克隽:对沈阳这样的城市来说,低碳城市反而会增强竞争力,让他们赚钱。沈阳是制造业集中的地方,比如这里的精密机床,在政府的要求下,做得特别节能,有极强的竞争力。全球28种重大低碳技术,转向生产时,都需要制造设备,那么沈阳就有强大的优势。

沈阳这样的城市不但要自己低碳发展,还要致力于全国的低碳发展,致力于全球的低碳发展。因为全国全世界都发展低碳经济,才需要沈阳的节能机床。

这也应该是中国的战略目标。在减排方面,目前中国是被推着往前进,而在不久的将来,中国应该推动全世界减排,因为中国有先进的低碳技术,要推动中国的技术标准成为世界标准。在未来的世界格局中,谁能提供核心技术,谁就具有经济竞争力。

我们研究小组跟踪了几百种与低碳有关的技术,发现非常多的先进技术在中国。如果其他国家不发展低碳经济,以后只好到中国来买技术。比如中国的的燃煤发电技术,印尼100%从中国进口。中国的成本只有美国的一半,这种技术对印度的冲击特别大。还有一位马来西亚人就对我说:“以后的电动车,我们肯定得买中国的。”

最后的世界格局,就是大制造企业之间和大国之间技术竞争的游戏。谈判的游戏应该结束了。
 

刘鉴强,中外对话北京办公室编辑

首页图片来自 Stuck in Customs

发表评论 Post a comment

评论通过管理员审核后翻译成中文或英文。 最大字符 1200。

Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated. Maximum characters 1200.

评论 comments

Default thumb avatar
dengdeng

不停的建

有研究说,中国房屋的平均寿命只有三十年,也就是说改革开放初期的房子基本都拆了。拆了盖,盖了拆,你那材料纵使再环保,怎能低碳的了?

广州政府最近办亚运更可笑,居然为了让开幕式拍的好看,鼓励市民把家里的灯都打开。

中国很多城市喜欢搞灯光工程,搞面子工程,比如在旧房子上糊一层纸在画上窗户之类的,结果搞的越来越没有面子。

Non-stop building

Studies have said that the average life expectancy of a house in China is just 30 years, which means that basically all the houses from the beginning of the Reform and Opening up have been demolished. Demolished and built, built and demolished, even if the materials used were environmentally friendly, how low-carbon can it be?

Even more ridiculous is recently at the Asian Games, the Guangzhou government encouraged residents to turn on all the lights at home so that the opening ceremony would look better when filmed.

Many cities in China like to do lighting projects, in other words "face-saving" projects, such as pasting a layer of paper on the painted windows of old houses, which results in more face being lost.

Default thumb avatar Reply arrow
gaidee

“天下的乌鸦”和“面子工程”

“广州政府最近办亚运更可笑,居然为了让开幕式拍的好看,鼓励市民把家里的灯都打开。”:更可笑,或者更可悲的是,即便没有政府的鼓励,一些发达国家(包括美国和日本)民众“自愿”把自己的灯打开,以便让google地图上自己的家的夜色看起来更美好,体现自己了不起的“living standard”。Google上这样的卫星照片很多呢!

"Crows under the sky" and "face-saving projects"

"Even more ridiculous is recently at the Asian Games, the Guangzhou government encouraged residents to turn on all the lights at home so that the opening ceremony would look better when filmed.": What is funny or sad, is that even without the government's encouragement, the people of some developed countries (including the United States and Japan) "willingly" turn on their lights so that their house looks more beautiful in the night scene on Google maps and reflect on their great "living standard". There are so many satellite pictures on Google like this!

Default thumb avatar
gaidee

知之为知之

悲哀的是我们连我们不知道什么都不知道,那还叫做“是知也”嘛?在强烈的民族主义的背后是无知。
世界上哪儿实现了所谓的低碳城市,取决于你对低碳城市的定义如何。而这个定义呢,还犹抱琵琶半遮面。搞减肥,还有个什么公式可以对照自己高矮胖瘦,弄个轰轰烈烈的低碳竟然什么“公式”都没有,可见这个世界已经到了多么“高级的愚昧”程度了。
低碳社区在哪儿呢?农村嘛,自行车都不要,更何况自行车道了,自己走路。自己种菜。上班10分钟,中午还能睡个午觉,晚上8点钟漆黑一片,8点半上床,早上6点起床(睡不着嘛),过着日出而作日落而息之惬意生活,谓之低碳也。中国之低碳,地摊之别称也。悲乎?

We know what we know

The sad thing is that we don't even know what we don't know, can we still say "that is knowledge"? Behind strong nationalism, is ignorance.
Where in the world are these so-called low carbon cities, depends on how you define low carbon city. And this definition is still obscure. For losing weight, there are formulas to compare your height and weight, but no "formulas" for getting low carbon. It goes to show the high level of ignorance in this world.
Where are the low carbon societies? In rural areas, they don't even want bicycles, let alone bicycle lanes because they walk. They plant their own crops. It takes ten minutes to go to work and they can even take a nap at noon. It is dark by 8pm so they go to bed at 8:30 and wake up at 6am (they can't sleep). They live comfortably, working at sunrise and resting at sunset, which is also low carbon. Another name for this is China's low carbon. Is it sad?

Default thumb avatar
ruud

美好的设想?

有趣的文章,只是不太明白文章最后的大转弯。突然间(不久的将来)中国拥有了推动世界走向节能减排的所有低碳技术?是的,将这作为战术的一部分是个很好的愿景,而这又将如何实现呢?

目前为止,可能只有沈阳进行了真正的低碳尝试吧?

据我所知中国还在建造大量建筑,尽管过去的10年内他们已经建造了未来50年可使用的建筑,并占用了低碳排放的大量指标,他们该如何减少碳排放呢?

+大多数建筑的质量不高,比如说绝缘层质量很差,从而在室内保温时浪费了大量能源。

+大多数的设计都忽视了节约空调耗能的因素。看看从地板到天花板,很多玻璃材质外立面的建筑,特别是朝南面,几乎没有任何遮光或者挡板以抵消阳光直射产生的热量。

不要从运输业开始做起,我想大多数人已经从日常生活中吃够了苦头。

Wishfull thinking?

Interesting article, just do not understand the U-Turn at the bottom. Suddenly (in the near future) China has all the low-carbon technology to push back the rest of the world? Yes, a nice dream to have this as part of the strategy, and how is this going to be delivered?

So far it maybe is only Shenyang that is making a genuine low-carbon attempt?

I know China still has to build a lot of new buildings. However the stuff that has been build over the past 10 years, and comprises already a very large part of the buildings to be used in the 50 years to come, are of such low standard that they are total carbon / energy wasters. How can you reduce emissions?

+ Most construction is of low quality: e.g. insulation is really bad and energy wasted due to heat / cold loss are tremendous

+ Most design is in such a way it is a total energy waste on airconditioning. Look at the floor to ceiling glass buildings facing south without even the slightest bit of tinted glass or other way to keep out the heat from sunlight?

Will not start on the transportation issues, I think most people suffer enough from this on a daily basis...

Default thumb avatar
gaidee

Copy Curitiba, why not?

The success at Curitiba, capital city of Parana, Brazil offers us and the world the opportunity what good intention, good design that is centered around people will work in a perfect way towards low carbon. Curitiba first pioneered the concept of Bus Rapid Transit, and it is the second thing only to football maybe, a huge success yet so few people knows its existence. We turned to the West so often for a solution that does not exist at all, but we should really turn to the humble small city, a population of about 2 million.It is located in a standard developing country ( although grows very fast recently afetr decades of mess before 00s), and it is not that rich which will be good enough to inspire other bold cities like Shenyang. So why don't copy Curitiba, is a question I leave to dear readers.

为什么不学习库里提巴呢?

位于巴西巴拉那的中心城市库里提巴的成功经验给我们和全世界展示了,以人为本的好的目标和设计,是可以完美实现低碳之路的。库里提巴更先锋性的开创了巴士快速公交系统的理念,这可能是他们的足球之后的另一大骄傲,然后这一巨大成功却鲜为人知。我们常常着眼西方国家,寻找根本不存在的解决方法,可是也许我们应该转向这个大约两百万人口,更小更平民的城市寻找答案。它坐落于一个典型的发展中国家(虽然在结束了2000年前的混乱后,这个国家最近增长迅速),而且它并不富裕,但这对于启发其他类似沈阳这样大胆创新的城市而言,反而是件好事。所以,留给亲爱读者们的问题是,为什么不学习库里提巴呢?

Default thumb avatar
eduard

只要努力的方向对了。。

低碳城市作为政治口号,能有效呼吁百姓改进城市的能源浪费和环境污染。当然,并不能完全提供一个标准,除非各国的城市定义不一样(城市以行政管理和人口密度来定义?)在中国,很多城市有广大农村,有些则没有,工业的基础也都大不相同。主要的问题是每个城市(政府或人民)必须被激励去主动采取措施削减将来的碳排量,例如加强公共交通和自行车,高能效建筑,智能测量仪和工业的巩固。每几年,每个城市都需要重新调整行为准绳以避免因强制减排产生的分配不当。

As long as it works in the right direction...

"Low-carbon city" may be useful as a political slogan that motivates people to improve their city's waste of energy and atmospheric pollution. Of course, it cannot provide absolute standards, if only because the definition of a "city" (by administrative control or by population density?) may differ between countries. In China some municipalities may have large rural areas, while others have not, and their industrial basis may differ greatly. The main thing is that each city (both its administration and its people) should be motivated to take measures that reduce future carbon use, such as emphasizing public transport and bicycles, energy-efficient buildings, smart meters and industrial consolidation. Every few years, one should adjust the yardsticks of performance in order to avoid misallocation resulting from chasing targets.

Default thumb avatar
jimrothstein

提神的直率

欣赏姜克隽的直率,一语道破了“低碳城市”的用途。

请问在沈阳的案例中,能否展示一些具体的项目成果?或者具体的目标,例如能在旧的污染模式中实现多少减排?

Refreshing candor

Appreciate Jiang Kejun's candor about use of "low-carbon city."

In case of Shenyang, any suggestions for specific Shenyang projects to see? Or specific goals, for example reductions we should see in old-fashion air pollution?

Default thumb avatar
cdhelennh

这个答案很有趣

刘老师的问题“为什么沈阳这么积极建低碳城市?他们有什么动力?”
姜克隽的答案非常有逻辑--
放之四海而皆准的原因啊:长官意识嘛!
“低碳城市”这个概念什么时候能被专家们、长官们好好解读成对老百姓有益的概念,才会真正发动起更广大的群众加入。否则都是空谈。

Interesting response

Liu's question "Why is Shenyang so active in this field? What’s the motive?"
Jiang Kejun's response is very logical --
The universal reason is official conciousness!
When the concept of a "low-carbon city" can be interpreted by experts and officials to be a concept that benefits the people, only then will it mobilise the masses to join in. Otherwise it's all just talk.