字号 ·· | 护眼
微软全国广播公司

特朗普糟糕的政策决定如何导致了这一出人意料的结局How Trump’s terrible policy decisions led to this one surprising outcome

点「原文对照」整页切到原文,或双击某段只看那段的原文。

唐纳德·特朗普总统的第二届政府迄今已发动了多场战争,既有实战也有隐喻之战。但在过去两年的灾难性荒诞之中,却出现了一种扭曲的命运安排:特朗普决定对伊朗发动战争,在这个过程中反而可能让环境受益。

President Donald Trump’s second administration has by now waged numerous wars, both literal and metaphorical But amid the catastrophic absurdity of the past two years, a twisted case of kismet has emerged: Trump’s decision to launch a war against Iran may have done the environment a favor in the process.

是的,很难想象特朗普会做任何有利于气候的事。但据《华盛顿邮报》对国际能源署数据的分析,这正是发生的情况。国际能源署最初预测,今年的排放量将比去年大幅跃升。但来自中东的能源运输因德黑兰封锁霍尔木兹海峡而持续受阻。这反过来促使全球石油和天然气消费减少,从而大幅降低了总体碳排放。正如《邮报》所报道:国际能源署的分析表明,2026年全球石油需求将比去年下降2.5%。这将抵消4200万辆内燃机汽车产生的温室气体排放量。

Yes, it is hard to imagine Trump doing anything that benefits the climate. But according to a Washington Post analysis of International Energy Agency data that’s exactly what has happened. The IEA initially predicted a big jump in emissions this year compared with last year. But energy shipments from the Middle East remain stymied by Tehran closing the Strait of Hormuz. That in turn has prompted a reduction in oil and gas consumption around the world, which has significantly reduced overall carbon emissions. As the Post reported: The IEA analysis suggests global demand for oil in 2026 will decline 2.5 percent compared with last year. That would erase the amount of greenhouse gas emissions created by 42 million internal combustion engine cars.

而国际能源署最初预测,世界对石油和天然气的需求将比去年大幅增长,以至于其1月预测与实际发生情况之间的差距,相当于避免了1.03亿辆汽车的排放。

And the IEA had initially projected the world’s appetite for oil and gas would grow significantly over last year, so much so that the difference between its January projections and what is actually happening is the equivalent of avoiding the emissions from 103 million cars.

我再怎么强调都不为过,这一结果完全是无心之举。特朗普在二月发动的这场战争,在人员伤亡、国内经济影响、以及大选前对其政党造成的毁灭性政治打击方面,都极其惨烈且代价高昂。在这个世界上,绝无可能特朗普——其能源政策以“钻探,宝贝,钻探”而闻名——在批准发动战争时会怀揣环保主义目标。(七个月后,几乎没有证据表明特朗普当时心中有任何具体目标。)特朗普任命了一位充其量只能算对气候问题漠不关心的人领导环境保护局,并任命一位彻头彻尾的气候怀疑论者监督最新版《国家气候评估》的起草工作。结果,旨在减少排放的主要法规和推动清洁能源的举措被彻底废除,并被贴上“绿色新骗局”的标签。石油分析师因伊朗战争冲击市场而经历“悲伤的五个阶段”:经济编辑 2026年9月18日 让此案更引人入胜的是,上一次全球碳排放出现如此大幅下降时,特朗普正在任。

I cannot stress enough how inadvertent this outcome is. The war that Trump launched in February has been horrific and costly in terms of human life economic effects at home the crushing political impact on his party before a crucial election. There’s no world in which Trump, whose energy policy famously boils down to “drill, baby, drill,” had environmentalist goals in mind ahead of greenlighting the war. (Seven months later, there’s little evidence Trump had concrete goals in mind at all.) Trump has appointed a man who is, at best, climate apathetic to head the Environmental Protection Agency and an outright climate skeptic to oversee the newest draft of the National Climate Assessment. As a result, major regulations intended to reduce emissions and initiatives to promote cleaner energy have been gutted and branded as part of a “Green New Scam.” Oil analysts going through ‘the stages of grief’ amid Iran war impacting market: Economics editor September 18, 2026 What makes this case even more intriguing is that Trump was in office the last time we saw such a major dip in global carbon output.

2020年初,新冠疫情刚刚开始蔓延,美国对大流行病的准备工作极其不足。在特朗普花了数周时间公开否认病毒构成重大威胁后,显而易见,政府缺乏有效遏制疫情的能力。由此导致的全国性封锁在全球范围内被效仿,引发了经济产出的大幅放缓。

In early 2020, when Covid-19 was just beginning to take hold, America was woefully unprepared for a pandemic. After Trump spent weeks publicly denying the virus was a major threat, it became clear that the administration was ill equipped to effectively contain it. The resulting nationwide quarantines were emulated on a global scale, prompting a massive slowdown in economic output.

随着需求减少,化石燃料消费和随之而来的二氧化碳排放也随之暴跌。研究表明,正如俗话所说,大自然曾一度在“自我修复”,但仅仅是片刻。随着封锁结束和经济复苏,需求再次上升,抵消了已取得的大部分进展。

With that reduced demand, fossil fuel consumption and the resultant CO2 emissions also plummeted Studies would show that for a moment, as the saying went, nature was healing only for a moment As lockdowns ended and economies came back to life, demand rose again to undo most of the progress that had been made.

冲突持续时间越长、石油运输受阻时间越久,我们目前看到的石油需求变化就越有可能变成永久性的。

With that reduced demand, fossil fuel consumption and the resultant CO2 emissions also plummeted Studies would show that for a moment, as the saying went, nature was healing only for a moment As lockdowns ended and economies came back to life, demand rose again to undo most of the progress that had been made.

Grist 的 Kate Yoder 最近指出,面对更高的汽油价格,美国人已经改变了一些行为,例如减少驾车、更多地利用公共交通。在全球范围内,人们对抵御伊朗战争和俄罗斯入侵乌克兰所引发的那种能源冲击产生了新的兴趣。值得注意的是,自 2 月以来,中国的太阳能电池板和电动汽车出现了出口热潮,因为亚洲消费者尤其在寻找化石燃料的替代品。

The longer the conflict persists and oil shipments remain hindered, the more likely the shifts in oil demand we’re seeing are to become permanent. Grist’s Kate Yoder recently noted Americans have changed some behaviors while facing higher gas prices, such as driving less and utilizing public transportation more. Globally there’s been a new interest in insulating against the kind of energy shocks the Iran war and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine sparked. Tellingly, China has seen a boom in exports of its solar panels and electric vehicles since February as Asian consumers especially look for alternatives to fossil fuels.

考虑到特朗普遇到的困难,无法预知伊朗战争何时或如何结束。但冲突持续的时间越长、石油运输受阻的时间越长,我们目前看到的石油需求转变就越有可能变成永久性的。

Given the difficulties Trump has had, there’s no telling when or how the Iran war will end. But the longer the conflict persists and oil shipments remain hindered, the more likely the shifts in oil demand we’re seeing are to become permanent.

现任政府采取任何措施来刻意促成这一结果的可能性极低。但如果每次特朗普通过糟糕的政策决定意外地降低全球碳排放我就能得到一枚五分镍币,我现在就会有两枚。正如一位虚构的疯狂科学家曾说的那样:“虽然不多,但发生了两次真奇怪,对吧?”

This administration doing anything to purposefully encourage that outcome is deeply unlikely. But if I had a nickel for every time Trump accidentally drove down global carbon emissions through a terrible policy decision, I’d have two nickels. Which, as a fictional mad scientist once said“isn’t a lot, but it’s weird that it happened twice, right?”

文章《特朗普的糟糕政策决定如何导致了这一惊人结果》 MS NOW

The post How Trump’s terrible policy decisions led to this one surprising outcome MS NOW