MyOOPS開放式課程
請加入會員以使用更多個人化功能
來自全球頂尖大學的開放式課程,現在由世界各國的數千名義工志工為您翻譯成中文。請免費享用!
課程來源:TED
     

 

Jennifer Granholm 談關於潔淨能源的建議-「邁向巔峰」政策!

Jennifer Granholm: A clean energy proposal -- race to the top!

 

Photo of three lions hunting on the Serengeti.

講者:Jennifer Granholm

2013年2月演講,2013年2月在TED2013上線

 

翻譯:洪曉慧

編輯:朱學恆

簡繁轉換:洪曉慧

後製:洪曉慧

字幕影片後制:謝旻均

 

影片請按此下載

MAC及手持裝置版本請按此下載

閱讀中文字幕純文字版本

 

關於這場演講

在這場為TED2013會議揭開序幕的演講中,Jennifer Granholm以美國人的立場,提出一個與全球息息相關的問題:如何創造更多就業機會?她的遠大理想是:投資新型替代能源。她的巨大挑戰是:是否無論在跛腳國會支持與否的情況下,都能達成這個理想?

 

關於Jennifer Granholm

曾經擔任兩任密西根州長的Jennifer M. Granholm提出一項建議:賦予全國各州藉由潔淨能源「邁向巔峰」政策創造就業機會的權利。

 

為什麼要聽她演講

Jennifer M. Granholm於2002年當選密西根州長,2006年,她再次以密西根州長選舉史上最高票當選。身為州長的Granholm,率領密西根度過因汽車及製造業崩潰而導致的嚴重經濟衰退。她努力不懈地替密西根創造多樣化經濟,鞏固汽車工業,保留先進製造業,並將新興產業-例如潔淨能源-納入密西根經濟體系中。

 

任職州長期間,她提倡潔淨能源政策,與企業界、勞工界、共和黨及民主黨合作,替密西根創造嶄新的經濟機會。2005年,Granholm的經濟開發團隊整合一項激進策略,使密西根州成為北美潔淨能源開發樞紐,藉由於密西根開發完整供應鏈,促進企業、政府與研究人員間的重要合作關係,並建立經濟獎勵機制,使密西根成為企業駐地。Granholm的計劃包括針對電池製造、生質能源、太陽能和風力等特定產業的集群策略。她的領導替密西根吸引超過89,000個潔淨能源工作機會,並替相關行業吸引94億美元的投資。她於2011年初卸下州長職務時,密西根經濟已逐漸回溫,蓋洛普市調公司將密西根列為全美景氣復甦情況最佳的一洲。

 

她的著作《州長的故事:爭取工作機會及美國經濟的未來》,闡述密西根州如何以創新手法度過經濟風暴,並提供亟需創造工作機會之國家建議。

 

Jennifer Granholm的英語網上資料

Twitter: @JenGranholm

 

[TED科技‧娛樂‧設計]

已有中譯字幕的TED影片目錄(繁體)(簡體)。請注意繁簡目錄是不一樣的。

 

Jennifer Granholm 談關於潔淨能源的建議-「邁向巔峰」政策!

 

好,介紹中說我是密西根前州長,但事實上我是一名科學家。好吧,一名政治科學家,算不上正牌貨。但我的實驗室是民主實驗室-即密西根州。如同任何一位優秀科學家,我的試驗是:什麼政策能為多數人帶來最大福祉?但其中存在三個問題,三個我無法解決的難題。我希望與大家分享這些問題,但最重要的是,我認為我已想出其中一個解決之道。

 

第一個問題不僅是密西根州,也是每個州都面臨的問題-如何在全球經濟市場替美國創造良好就業機會?

 

因此,我想與大家分享一些來自我實驗室的經驗資料。我於2002年當選州長,就任屆滿一年後的2003年,我接到一位幕僚的電話,他說,「州長,我們有個大問題。一個位於本州、擁有八千人口、名叫格林維爾的小社區即將失去主要雇主-伊萊克斯公司經營的冰箱工廠。」

 

我說,「好,有多少居民任職於伊萊克斯公司?」

 

他說,「八千位格林維爾居民中的三千人。」

 

因此它是僅擁有一間公司的城鎮。伊萊克斯打算遷往墨西哥。

 

於是我說,「別擔心,我是新州長,我們可以解決這個問題。我將帶領全體閣員前往格林維爾,提出伊萊克斯無法拒絕的提議。」

 

因此我帶領全體閣員,與格林維爾所有顯要人士見面:市長、市政執行長、社區學院院長。基本上,我們傾盡一切,將所有籌碼攤在桌上-即所謂的獎勵措施-說服伊萊克斯留下。我們拿出所有籌碼,推過桌面,送到伊萊克斯主管面前。這些籌碼包括免稅20年;或我們將提供金援,協助該公司建設一座新工廠。代表工人的UAW(美國汽車工會)說,他們將提供前所未有的優惠,為了將工作機會留在格林維爾做出犧牲。

 

於是伊萊克斯主管拿起籌碼-我們列出的獎勵-到房外商量了17分鐘。回來後,他們說,「哇,這是有史以來,社區為了留住工作機會所做的最慷慨嘗試,但無法彌補我們在墨西哥華雷斯可支付1.57美元時薪的事實,因此我們決定離開。」

 

他們這麼做了。他們的決定彷彿在小小的格林維爾引爆一枚核彈。事實上,這確實震驚了整個工廠。圖中是上最後一天班的男子。最後一個冰箱經過裝配線那個月,密西根格林維爾鎮的伊萊克斯雇員自行舉辦了一場聚會,他們稱之為最後的晚餐,地點在格林維爾一座大型室內展覽館。我參加了那場聚會,因為身為州長的我沮喪萬分,我無力阻止這些工作機會外流,我想與他們共同承擔這份悲傷。當我走進館內時,已有上千人到場。這是一場盛大的聚會,人們圍在圓桌旁吃便當,一個悲傷的樂團演奏著音樂,或者說一個樂團演奏著悲傷的音樂,或許兩者皆是。(笑聲)

 

一名刺青、綁馬尾、戴棒球帽的男子來到我面前。他帶著兩個女兒,他說,「州長,這是我兩個女兒。我48歲,在這間工廠工作了30年,我高中畢業後就進了工廠。我父親在這間工廠工作,我祖父在這間工廠工作,我只知道如何製造冰箱。」他看著女兒,將手放在胸口,然後說,「所以,州長,請告訴我,還有誰會雇用我?還有誰會雇用我?」這不僅是這名男子的疑問,也是館內每個人的疑問,坦白說,也是本世紀前十年當中,五萬間歇業工廠中每位工人的疑問。第一個難題:如何在全球經濟市場替美國創造就業機會?

 

我很快地說明第二個難題:如何解決全球氣候變化問題-當我國甚至沒有國家能源政策,當國會僵局似乎已成常態?事實上,最近所做的一項民意調查中,民調機構將國會支持率與一些令人不快的事物比較。調查發現,事實上國會支持率比蟑螂、蝨子、五分錢樂團、根管治療和唐納.川普還糟。(笑聲)但別急,好消息是,至少比製毒實驗室和淋病好些。(笑聲)問題大了,伙伴們。

 

因此這讓我思考:在這個實驗室中,在我眼前這個民主實驗室中,到底發生了什麼事?兩黨曾經接受哪些確實導致變化的政策法規?因此,如果我問大家,例如,歐巴馬政府有哪些政策導致整個國家產生巨大變化?你們會說什麼?你們或許會說歐巴馬健保法案,除了那些非自願的變化-如我們所知,只有半數州贊成。你們或許會說經濟復甦法案,但那不需要改變政策。造成大規模變化的政策是「邁向巔峰」(Race to the Top)教育政策。為什麼?政府提供45億美元資金,讓全國州長爭取。48名州長參與競爭,說服48個州議會從根本提升高中生素質,使他們全都參與大學預備課程。48州紛紛響應,全面建立國家能源(訂正:教育)政策。

 

因此我想,好,為何我們不如法炮製,建立潔淨能源的「邁向巔峰」政策?因為,畢竟,如果觀察整體局勢,過去八年中,全球私營機構投資1.6兆美元,每一塊美元都代表一份工作。這些工作流向何方?好,它們流向擁有政策的地方,例如中國。事實上,我曾經前往中國,觀察他們的做法。他們為我們的代表團舉行盛大表演,某場演出中,我站在房間後方,站在一名中國官員身旁,我們觀賞演出時,他說,「所以,州長,妳認為美國何時能制定出國家能源政策?」我說,「天哪-國會、僵局,誰知道?」

 

他所做的是-像這樣-然後說,「慢慢來。」因為他們將我們的消極視為他們的機會。

 

因此,如果我們決定替全國州長發起一項競爭,參與這場競爭的代價,相當於兩黨於國會批准「邁向巔峰」教育政策的金額-45億美元。聽起來似乎是筆鉅款,但事實上少於聯邦政府開銷的千分之一,不過是聯邦預算的零頭。但參與這場競爭的代價可說符合總統的目標,他希望國會於2030年達成採用 80 % 潔淨能源的目標。換句話說,到了2030年,你使用的能源必須 80 % 來自潔淨能源。為何不要求全國各州共襄盛舉?

 

想像一下可能發生的情況,因為每個地區都能提供某些資源。或許以愛荷華州和俄亥俄州為例-順帶一提,這是兩個政治關鍵州。兩位州長會說,我們將領頭生產風力渦輪機和風力。或以太陽能州、陽光地帶為例,他們將成為替國家生產太陽能的州。也許Jerry Brown(加州州長)會說,「好,我將在加州建立產業集群,生產太陽能板,這樣我們就不需向中國採購,而向美國採購。」事實上,全國各地都能如法炮製。如你們所知,全國各地都有機會生產太陽能和風力。事實上,如果以西北各州為例,他們可以生產地熱。或考慮德州的情況,他們可領頭建設智慧電網。擁有樹林和閒置農地的中部及東部各州,他們或許會說,我們將領頭生產生質燃料。東北各州會說,我們將領頭解決能源效率問題。東部沿岸各州會說,我們將領頭建設海上風力發電廠。或考慮密西根州的情況,他們可領頭生產電動車供電裝置,例如鋰電池。每個地區都能提供某些資源。如果發起一項競爭,有利於各州,也有利於聯邦,它將獲得支持,甚至可能獲得德州和南卡羅萊納州的支持-它們並未支持「邁向巔峰」教育政策。這場競爭甚至可能獲得他們的支持。為什麼?因為共和黨和民主黨州長都喜歡剪綵,我們希望帶來就業機會-只是說說罷了。在這些民主實驗室中,這場競爭將促進各州的創新。

 

現在,任何關注當前政治局勢的人或許會說,「好,很棒的主意,但可行嗎?讓國會將45億美元納入預算審查?他們一毛也不會同意。」因此你可以等待國會審查,但必定會十分不耐煩。或者-你可以採取不同作法。我們可以繞過國會,繞過國會,如果-如果我們替州長建立由私營機構提供的競爭?如果TED演講現場,某些擁有高淨值資產的公司和個人決定攜手合作,只要其中幾位,建立提供給全國州長的「邁向巔峰」競爭,觀察州長的反應?如果這一切全都從TED現場開始?如果在座各位想出如何打破僵局,替美國創造高薪工作機會-(掌聲)-提出國家能源政策,由下而上地建立國家能源戰略?

 

因為,親愛的TED會員,如果你們像我一樣沒耐心,你們知道,我們的經濟競爭對手,其他國家已加入這場競爭,分食我們的工作機會。我們可以選擇是否加入這場競爭;我們可以任人魚肉,或加入戰局。我不知道你們的想法,但我寧可加入其中。

 

十分感謝。(掌聲)

 

以下為系統擷取之英文原文

About the talk

Kicking off the TED2013 conference, Jennifer Granholm asks a very American question with worldwide implications: How do we make more jobs? Her big idea: Invest in new alternative energy sources. And her big challenge: Can it be done with or without our broken Congress?
 
About the speaker
A former two-term governor of Michigan, Jennifer M. Granholm makes the case for empowering states to create jobs through a Clean Energy Jobs Race to the Top.
 
About the transcript

The first problem that not just Michigan, but every state, faces is, how do you create good jobs in America in a global economy?

So let me share with you some empirical data from my lab. I was elected in 2002 and, at the end of my first year in office in 2003, I got a call from one of my staff members, who said, "Gov, we have a big problem. We have a little tiny community called Greenville, Michigan, population 8,000, and they are about to lose their major employer, which is a refrigerator factory that's operated by Electrolux."

And I said, "Well, how many people work at Electrolux?"

And he said, "3,000 of the 8,000 people in Greenville."

So it is a one-company town. And Electrolux was going to go to Mexico.

So I said, "Forget that. I'm the new Governor. We can fix this. We're going to go to Greenville with my whole cabinet and we will just make Electrolux an offer they can't refuse."

So I brought my whole cabinet, and we met with all of the pooh-bahs of little Greenville -- the mayor, the city manager, the head of the community college -- and we basically emptied our pockets and put all of our chips on the table, incentives, you name it, to convince Electrolux to stay, and as we made our pile of chips, we slid them across the table to the management of Electrolux. And in the pile were things like zero taxes for 20 years, or that we'd help to build a new factory for the company, we'd help to finance it. The UAW, who represented the workers, said they would offer unprecedented concessions, sacrifices to just keep those jobs in Greenville.

So the management of Electrolux took our pile, our list of incentives, and they went outside the room for 17 minutes, and they came back in and they said, "Wow, this is the most generous any community has ever been to try to keep jobs here. But there's nothing you can do to compensate for the fact that we can pay $1.57 an hour in Juarez, Mexico. So we're leaving."

And they did. And when they did, it was like a nuclear bomb went off in little Greenville. In fact, they did implode the factory. That's a guy that is walking on his last day of work. And on the month that the last refrigerator rolled off the assembly line, the employees of Electrolux in Greenville, Michigan, had a gathering for themselves that they called the last supper. It was in a big pavilion in Greenville, an indoor pavilion, and I went to it because I was so frustrated as Governor that I couldn't stop the outflow of these jobs, and I wanted to grieve with them, and as I went into the room-- there's thousands of people there. It was a just big thing. People were eating boxed lunches on roundtop tables, and there was a sad band playing music, or a band playing sad music, probably both. (Laughter)

And this guy comes up to me, and he's got tattoos and his ponytail and his baseball cap on, and he had his two daughters with him, and he said, "Gov, these are my two daughters." He said, "I'm 48 years old, and I have worked at this factory for 30 years. I went from high school to factory. My father worked at this factory," he said. "My grandfather worked at this factory. All I know is how to make refrigerators." And he looked at his daughters, and he puts his hand on his chest, and he says, "So, Gov, tell me, who is ever going to hire me? Who is ever going to hire me?" And that was asked not just by that guybut by everyone in the pavilion, and frankly, by every worker at one of the 50,000 factoriesthat closed in the first decade of this century. Enigma number one: How do you create jobsin America in a global economy?

Number two, very quickly: How do you solve global climate change when we don't even have a national energy policy in this country and when gridlock in Congress seems to be the norm? In fact, there was a poll that was done recently and the pollster compared Congress's approval ratings to a number of other unpleasant things, and it was found, in fact, that Congress's approval rating is worse than cockroaches, lice, Nickelback the band, root canals and Donald Trump. (Laughter) But wait, the good news is it's at least better than meth labs and gonorrhea. (Laughter) We got a problem, folks.

So it got me thinking, what is it? What in the laboratory that I see out there, the laboratories of democracy, what has happened? What policy prescriptions have happened that actually cause changes to occur and that have been accepted in a bipartisan way? So if I asked you, for example, what was the Obama Administration policy that caused massive changes across the country, what would you say? You might say Obamacare, except for those were not voluntary changes. As we know, only half the states have opted in. We might say the Recovery Act, but those didn't require policy changes. The thing that caused massive policy changes to occur was Race to the Top for education. Why? The government put a $4.5 billion pot and said to the governors across the country, compete for it. Forty-eight governors competed, convincing 48 state legislatures to essentially raise standards for high schoolers so that they all take a college prep curriculum. Forty-eight states opted in, creating a national [education] policy from the bottom up.

So I thought, well, why can't we do something like that and create a clean energy jobs race to the top? Because after all, if you look at the context, 1.6 trillion dollars has been invested in the past eight years from the private sector globally, and every dollar represents a job,and where are those jobs going? Well, they're going to places that have policy, like China.In fact, I was in China to see what they were doing, and they were putting on a dog-and-pony show for the group that I was with, and I was standing in the back of the room during one of the demonstrations and standing next to one of the Chinese officials, and we were watching, and he says, "So, Gov, when do you think the U.S. is going to get national energy policy?" And I said, "Oh my God -- Congress, gridlock, who knows?"

And this is what he did, he goes, he says, "Take your time." Because they see our passivity as their opportunity.

So what if we decided to create a challenge to the governors of the country, and the price to entry into this competition used the same amount that the bipartisan group approved in Congress for the Race to the Top for education, 4.5 billion, which sounds like a lot, but actually it's less than one tenth of one percent of federal spending. It's a rounding error on the federal side. But price to entry into that competition would be, you could just, say, use the President's goal. He wants Congress to adopt a clean energy standard of 80 percent by 2030, in other words, that you'd have to get 80 percent of your energy from clean sources by the year 2030. Why not ask all of the states to do that instead? And imagine what might happen, because every region has something to offer. You might take states like Iowa and Ohio -- two very important political states, by the way -- those two governors, and they would say, we're going to lead the nation in producing the wind turbines and the wind energy. You might say the solar states, the sun belt, we're going to be the states that produce solar energy for the country, and maybe Jerry Brown says, "Well, I'm going to create an industry cluster in California to be able to produce the solar panels so that we're not buying them from China but we're buying them from the U.S." In fact, every region of the country could do this. You see, you've got solar and wind opportunity all across the nation.In fact, if you look just at the upper and northern states in the West, they could do geothermal, or you could look at Texas and say, we could lead the nation in the solutions to smart grid. In the middle eastern states which have access to forests and to agricultural waste, they might say, we're going to lead the nation in biofuels. In the upper northeast, we're going to lead the nation in energy efficiency solutions. Along the eastern seaboard, we're going to lead the nation in offshore wind. You might look at Michigan and say, we're going to lead the nation in producing the guts for the electric vehicle, like the lithium ion battery. Every region has something to offer, and if you created a competition, it respects the states and it respects federalism. It's opt-in. You might even get Texas and South Carolina, who didn't opt into the education Race to the Top, you might even get them to opt in. Why? Because Republican and Democratic governors love to cut ribbons. We want to bring jobs. I'm just saying. And it fosters innovation at the state level in these laboratories of democracy.

Now, any of you who are watching anything about politics lately might say, "Okay, great idea, but really? Congress putting four and a half billion dollars on the table? They can't agree to anything." So you could wait and go through Congress, although you should be very impatient. Or, you renegades, we could go around Congress. Go around Congress.What if we created a private sector challenge to the governors? What if several of the high-net worth companies and individuals who are here at TED decided that they would create, band together, just a couple of them, and create a national competition to the governors to have a race to the top and see how the governors respond? What if it all started here at TED? What if you were here when we figured out how to crack the code to create good paying jobs in America -- (Applause) -- and get national energy policy and we created a national energy strategy from the bottom up?

Because, dear TEDsters, if you are impatient like I am, you know that our economic competitors, our other nations, are in the game and are eating us for lunch. And we can get in the game or not. We can be at the table or we can be on the table. And I don't know about you, but I prefer to dine.


留下您對本課程的評論
標題:
您目前為非會員,留言名稱將顯示「匿名非會員」
只能進行20字留言

留言內容:

驗證碼請輸入2 + 4 =

標籤

現有標籤:1
新增標籤:


有關本課程的討論

目前暫無評論,快來留言吧!

Creative Commons授權條款 本站一切著作係採用 Creative Commons 授權條款授權。
協助推廣單位: