英國贊助小型室外地球工程實驗

A British science agency will provide 57 million pounds, or about $75 million, for researchers to examine ideas for artificially cooling the planet — including outdoor experiments to determine whether any of those ideas could actually work.

英國一間科學機構將提供5,700萬英鎊，約7,500萬美元，讓研究人員檢視人工冷卻地球的構想，包括戶外實驗，以確定這類想法是否確實可行。

The announcement, by the Advanced Research and Invention Agency, or ARIA, is among the largest single infusions of money to date toward research into “solar geoengineering”: the notion of injecting particles into the air to deflect some of the sun’s radiation back into space with the goal of reducing the Earth’s temperature.

先進研究與發明局（ARIA）的這項宣布，是迄今注入「太陽能地球工程」的最大單筆資金之一：概念是把微粒注入大氣，將部分太陽輻射偏轉回太空，達到降低地球氣溫目標。

The government initiative is focused on testing several types of solar geoengineering. Those approaches could include injecting aerosols, such as sulfur dioxide, into the stratosphere or shooting sea-salt aerosols into low-lying marine clouds to reflect more sunlight away from the Earth.

這項政府倡議聚焦在測試數種太陽能地球工程，方法包括將二氧化硫等氣溶膠注入平流層，或將海鹽氣溶膠射入低層海洋雲，以反射更多日光遠離地球。

The funding comes as the effects of climate change are becoming increasingly destructive. Last month was the warmest August on record, as measured by average global land and ocean surface temperatures, according to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

這筆資金到來之際，氣候變遷影響變得愈來愈具破壞性。根據美國國家海洋暨大氣總署，測量全球陸地與海洋表面平均溫度顯示，上個月是有史以來最熱的八月。

Yet, the greenhouse emissions that are driving climate change keep rising as humans continue to burn coal, oil and gas.

然而，隨著人類持續燃燒煤炭、石油與天然氣，導致氣候變遷的溫室氣體排放持續上升。

ARIA said it was pursuing geoengineering research because “even under the most aggressive scenarios” of cutting greenhouse gasses, it may not be possible to reduce those emissions fast enough to prevent dangerous increases in global temperatures.

ARIA表示，推動地球工程研究，是因為「即使在最積極的情況下」減少溫室氣體，減緩排放的速度可能還是不夠快，無法防止全球氣溫危險地上升。

That has led governments and scientists to increasingly consider ways to artificially cool the planet, effectively trying to buy time while heat-trapping pollution is reduced.

這讓政府與科學家愈來愈注意人工冷卻地球的方法，實際上這是在減少溫室氣體汙染的同時爭取時間。

But without conducting physical tests of those strategies, the agency said, “there is no prospect of being able to make proper judgments” about whether any type of geoengineering is “feasible, scalable, and controllable.”

該機構說，如沒對這些策略實體試驗，「就無法適當判斷」任何地球工程是否「可行、可擴大及可控制」。

Opponents of geoengineering say it would distract from the urgent need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. And they worry that the technology could have severe unintended consequences.

反對地球工程的人主張，該工程會分散減少溫室氣體排放迫切需要的注意力，他們並憂慮這項科技可能產生意想不到的嚴重後果。

To address the concern about outdoor experiments, the program will apply a set of constraints when it judges research proposals, British officials said. The technologies being examined must already have undergone modeling and indoor tests, and researchers must show that critical scientific questions “cannot be answered without an outdoor experiment.”

英國官員表示，為消除對於戶外實驗的疑慮，這項計畫在審查研究提案時會設定一系列限制。送審的技術須經過模擬與室內測試，研究者也須證明實驗的關鍵科學問題「非經戶外實驗無法解答」。

美國政治暴力問題已然失控？未必

When former President Donald Trump was nearly assassinated in Pennsylvania in July, a Dartmouth College political scientist named Sean Westwood happened to be in the middle of a research project asking Americans about political violence.

前總統川普7月在賓州差點被暗殺時，達特茅斯學院一個名叫威斯伍德的政治學家正在進行一項研究，詢問美國人政治暴力相關問題。

At the time, many feared that the shooting would lead to a growing appetite for more violence.

當時，許多人憂心，這起槍擊案將導致人們對更多暴力的興趣升高。

But Westwood and his colleagues found the opposite. In the weeks after the attack, Americans’ support for partisan violence, and murder specifically, diminished — and fell most sharply among Republicans who identify with Trump.

但威斯伍德和他的同事發現相反狀況。那起攻擊事件發生後數周內，美國人對於黨派暴力的支持降低，特別是對謀殺，而且在認同川普的共和黨人中降得最明顯。

Americans are still exceptionally hostile about people who disagree with them on politics, but “an assassination attempt did not inflame the tensions,” the authors write in a forthcoming paper in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

研究作者們在即將發表於「美國國家科學院院刊」的論文中寫道，美國人對政治上和他們意見不同的人仍特別有敵意，但「一起謀刺事件並未激起緊張局勢」。

Two unsuccessful attempts on Trump’s life, a daily barrage of violent threats against public officials of all stripes and finger-pointing from both parties have fueled the impression that the country’s politics are spinning out of control.

兩次刺殺川普未遂事件、日常一連串對各類公職人員的暴力威脅及兩黨互相指責，加強政治失控的印象。

But some common assumptions about political violence in America are not reinforced by recent data, according to several new studies.

但多項新研究指出，一些對美國政治暴力的普遍假設，沒有被數據進一步證實。

Instances of extremist violence have actually declined in recent years by some key measures. Although some Americans continue to say they approve of political violence, support for the most serious types of violence has not increased amid election-related tensions this year.

一些關鍵指標顯示，極端主義暴力事例近年來其實正在減少。雖然一些美國人持續表示他們支持政治暴力，但今年關於選舉的緊張局勢中，對於最嚴重類型暴力的支持沒有增加。

And neither apocalyptic political rhetoric nor extraordinary events over the past few years have produced eruptions of political violence of the sort that many feared would become more commonplace after the riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

而且，過去幾年無論是末日式政治言論，還是意想不到的事件，都沒有引爆許多人所擔心2021年1月6日國會暴亂後會更普遍的那類政治暴力。

In short, even amid an explosive political climate and some high-profile incidents, politics may not be becoming broadly more violent.

總之，即使處於一觸即發的政治情勢和一些備受關注的事件中，大體上而言，政治可能並未變得更暴力。

Such findings come with many caveats. Political violence in the United States remains rare, leaving relatively few data points to study. Trend lines can vary widely depending on the how you define violence and what questions you try to answer.

這類發現伴隨許多警告。美國政治暴力事件仍然少見，導致可供研究的相關數據相對較少。趨勢線差異可能很大，取決於如何定義暴力，及嘗試回答怎樣的問題。

In the United States as in other countries, recorded acts of right-wing political violence have been deadlier than left-wing violence. But Trump, not President Joe Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris, has been the target of two apparent assassination attempts this summer.

美國和其他國家一樣，有紀錄的右派政治暴力一直比左派致命。但川普成為今夏兩起暗殺企圖的目標，而非總統拜登或副總統賀錦麗。

Those attempts are also a stark reminder that such nation-transforming tragedies do not require many people — or even more than one.

這些企圖也清楚提醒人們，這類徹底改變國家的悲劇不需很多人參與，甚至只要一人就行。