生產(chǎn)違禁化學(xué)品，中國工廠成臭氧層“殺手”
中國興福——上個月，科學(xué)家們揭開了一個全球污染之謎：非法工業(yè)氣體排放量出現(xiàn)的一次出人意料的陡增。這些氣體會破壞大氣層中具有保護(hù)作用的臭氧層。
The unexpected increase is undermining what has been hailed as the most successful international environmental agreement ever enacted: the Montreal Protocol, which includes a ban on chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs, and which was expected to bring a full recovery of the ozone layer by midcentury. But the source of the pollution has remained unknown.
這種意外增長，正在破壞有著史上最成功國際環(huán)境協(xié)議之譽(yù)的《蒙特利爾議定書》(Montreal Protocol)的效果，該協(xié)議包括禁止使用氟氯烴，本來有望在本世紀(jì)中葉實(shí)現(xiàn)臭氧層的全面恢復(fù)。但污染源仍然未知。
Now, a trail of clues leads to this scrappy industrial boomtown in rural China.
現(xiàn)在，一連串的線索指向了中國農(nóng)村的這個繁榮的工業(yè)城鎮(zhèn)。
Interviews, documents and advertisements collected by The New York Times and independent investigators indicate that a major source — possibly the overwhelming one — is factories in China that have ignored a global ban and kept making or using the chemical, CFC-11, mostly to produce foam insulation for refrigerators and buildings.
《紐約時報》和獨(dú)立調(diào)查人員收集的采訪、文件和廣告表明，一個主要污染源——可能是占據(jù)絕對優(yōu)勢的來源——是中國的那些忽視全球禁令、繼續(xù)制造或使用化學(xué)品CFC-11的工廠，CFC-11主要用于生產(chǎn)冰箱和建筑物使用的泡沫隔熱材料。
“You had a choice: Choose the cheaper foam agent that’s not so good for the environment, or the expensive one that’s better for the environment,” said Zhang Wenbo, owner of a refrigerator factory here in Xingfu, in Shandong Province, where he and many other small-scale manufacturers said that until recently, they had used CFC-11 widely to make foam insulation.
“過去，你可以做一個選擇：選擇對環(huán)境不太好的較便宜的發(fā)泡劑，還是貴的、對環(huán)境好的發(fā)泡劑，”山東興福一家冰箱生產(chǎn)廠的廠長張文博(音)說。他和那里的其他許多小規(guī)模制造商表示，他們之前一直廣泛使用CFC-11制造泡沫絕緣材料，直到最近才有所改變。
“Of course, we chose the cheaper foam agent,” Mr. Zhang said during an interview in his office. “That’s how we survived.”
“我們當(dāng)然會選擇更便宜的發(fā)泡劑，”張文博在自己的辦公室接受采訪時說。“我們就是這樣活下來的。”
As he spoke, a crackdown was underway in the town and moments later, four officials entered Mr. Zhang’s factory, handed him a leaflet warning against a range environmental violations, including using CFC-11, and ordered his factory closed.
在他接受采訪之時，鎮(zhèn)上正在進(jìn)行打擊行動，不久張文博的工廠就來了四名官員，遞給他一張傳單，警告他不要違反一系列環(huán)境規(guī)定，包括使用CFC-11，并下令關(guān)閉他的工廠。
“They never told us until last year that it was damaging the atmosphere,” Mr. Zhang said. “Nobody came to check what we were using, so we thought it was O.K.”
“直到去年，他們才告訴我們，這種東西在破壞大氣層，”張文博說。“沒人來檢查我們用的是什么，所以我們以為沒問題。”
China has the world’s largest polyurethane foam market, making up about 40 percent of global consumption. And China accounted for nearly all East Asian production of CFC-11 and similar chemicals before they were banned.
中國擁有世界上最大的聚氨酯泡沫市場，約占全球消費(fèi)總量的40%。在被禁之前，東亞的CFC-11和類似的化學(xué)品幾乎都是中國生產(chǎn)的。
China’s struggle to eradicate CFC-11 embodies the hurdles it faces in cleaning up after decades of frenetic industrial expansion, when officials often treated pollution as a necessary price of prosperity. But it also has consequences far beyond the nation’s borders.
中國根除CFC-11的努力體現(xiàn)了在幾十年瘋狂的工業(yè)擴(kuò)張之后，中國在治理污染方面面臨的障礙。之前，官員們常常將污染視為繁榮的必要代價。但它造成的后果超越了國界。
Researchers said in a study published last month that a rise in emissions of CFC-11 was jeopardizing the effort to repair the ozone layer, which protects people and crops from the sun’s damaging ultraviolet rays.
在上個月發(fā)表的一項(xiàng)研究中，研究人員表示，CFC-11排放量的增加正在危及修復(fù)臭氧層的努力。臭氧層保護(hù)人類和農(nóng)作物免受太陽紫外線的傷害。
That effort began in the 1980s with the adoption of the Montreal Protocol, which ultimately outlawed CFC-11 and similar chemicals that destroy the ozone layer (and, because they are greenhouse gases, contribute to climate change). Scientists predicted that, as the chemicals produced before the ban came into force degraded and disappeared, the layer would be fully restored by the middle of this century. But the recent study said the new emissions could delay that recovery by a decade.
這項(xiàng)努力始于上世紀(jì)80年代，當(dāng)時通過的《蒙特利爾議定書》最終宣布禁止生產(chǎn)或使用CFC-11以及其他破壞臭氧層的類似化學(xué)品(并且，由于它們是溫室氣體，還會導(dǎo)致氣候變化)。科學(xué)家們預(yù)測，隨著禁令生效前生產(chǎn)的化學(xué)物質(zhì)的降解、消失，到本世紀(jì)中葉，臭氧層有望完全恢復(fù)。但前不久的研究表明，新的排放可能會將恢復(fù)推遲十年。
Some experts were skeptical that foam production in China could be the culprit.
一些專家猜測，中國的泡沫產(chǎn)品可能是罪魁禍?zhǔn)住?/p>
“It is a very large amount to appear so suddenly,” David Sherry, a British expert on ozone chemicals who has worked in China, said by email.
“短時間內(nèi)出現(xiàn)了大量氣體，”曾在中國工作的英國臭氧化學(xué)物質(zhì)專家戴維·謝利(David Sherry)在接受電子郵件采訪時說。
But the study’s authors said that such a large tide of emissions — on the order of 13,000 metric tons a year — could be explained only by new, illegal production, and said the source was probably in East Asia. Evidence suggests that an important focus may be small foam makers and their chemical suppliers in China, where regulators have long had a tough time bringing polluters to heel.
但該研究的作者們表示，如此大規(guī)模的排放——每年接近1.3萬噸——唯一的可能是出現(xiàn)了新的非法生產(chǎn)。他們還表示，排放源很可能在東亞。有證據(jù)表明，一個主要的焦點(diǎn)可能是中國的小型泡沫制造企業(yè)以及它們的化學(xué)品供應(yīng)商。在中國，監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)長期以來一直難以控制污染企業(yè)。
Chinese traders and experts candidly described how small, primitive chemical plants have kept making CFC-11 in spite of the ban, and their accounts are backed by government documents.
中國商人和專家坦率地介紹了簡陋的小化工廠如何不顧禁令繼續(xù)生產(chǎn)CFC-11，他們的說法也得到了政府文件的支持。
“Currently there is still a large volume of illegally produced CFC-11 being used in the foam industry,” Shao Changying, an environment official in Shandong, wrote in a report published last year. Another Shandong environment office report in 2016 described a “quite vigorous illegal production of outmoded CFC-11,” which it said was “bringing risks to the market and environment.”
“目前，泡沫行業(yè)仍在大量使用非法生產(chǎn)的CFC-11，”山東環(huán)保官員邵常盈在去年發(fā)表的一份報告中寫道。山東另一個環(huán)保辦公室2016年發(fā)表的報告稱“非法生產(chǎn)已淘汰CFC-11較為活躍”，報告稱這會“給市場和環(huán)境帶來風(fēng)險”。
Even while Shandong and other provinces have cracked down on the chemical, Chinese traders still offer it for sale online.
盡管山東等省份在打擊這種化工產(chǎn)品，但中國商人仍在網(wǎng)上銷售它。
Stephen O. Andersen, a former official with the United States Environmental Protection Agency who served on one of the Montreal Protocol’s advisory committees, said cheaper legal alternatives to CFC-11 were available. In interviews, though, small Chinese manufacturers seemed unaware of them or unwilling to pay the costs of converting their equipment to use them.
曾供職于美國環(huán)境保護(hù)署(United States Environmental Protection Agency)、參加過《蒙特利爾議定書》一個咨詢委員會的斯蒂芬·O·安德森(Stephen O. Andersen)表示，CFC-11有更便宜的合法替代品。然而，在采訪中，中國的小制造商們似乎不知道那些替代品的存在，或者不愿意為替換可使用它們的設(shè)備支付成本。
And Liu Le, a refrigeration expert in Shandong, said there were still companies ready to provide the CFC-11.
山東制冷專家劉樂表示，仍有公司準(zhǔn)備供應(yīng)CFC-11。
“When nobody is watching, they can make some, or when they get an order — an underground order — they can also produce it,” Mr. Liu said. “They produce for a while until they’re discovered, and then move on.”
“沒人注意時，他們會生產(chǎn)一些，接到訂單——地下訂單——他們也會生產(chǎn)，”劉樂說。“他們生產(chǎn)一段時間，被發(fā)現(xiàn)后就停止，然后繼續(xù)生產(chǎn)。”
An independent group, the Environmental Investigation Agency, said it had identified eight factories in four Chinese provinces where the chemical was being used in the foam-making process. The organization, based in Washington, said that and other evidence — including conversations with confirmed sellers of CFC-11 — pointed to the Chinese foam industry as the primary source of the new emissions.
美國獨(dú)立組織環(huán)境調(diào)查機(jī)構(gòu)(Environmental Investigation Agency)表示，它已發(fā)現(xiàn)中國四個省份的八家工廠在生產(chǎn)泡沫的過程中使用該化學(xué)品。這個位于華盛頓的組織表示，這一點(diǎn)，再加上其他證據(jù)——包括與已證實(shí)的CFC-11賣家的對話——都表明，中國泡沫行業(yè)是新排放的主要來源。
“The scale of this environmental crime is devastating, with massive potential impact on the climate and the ozone layer,” said Alexander von Bismarck, executive director of the group. He said the agency had given initial findings to the Chinese government and the secretariat of the Montreal Protocol, and would publish a full report next month. “We’re hoping for a strong response from a strong environmental agreement,” Mr. von Bismarck said.
“這種環(huán)境犯罪的規(guī)模是毀滅性的，對氣候和臭氧層具有巨大的潛在影響，”該組織的執(zhí)行主任亞歷山大·馮·俾斯麥(Alexander von Bismarck)說。他表示，該機(jī)構(gòu)已向中國政府和《蒙特利爾議定書》秘書處提交了初步調(diào)查結(jié)果，并將于下個月發(fā)布完整的報告。“我們希望強(qiáng)大的環(huán)境協(xié)議能帶來強(qiáng)烈的反應(yīng)，”馮·俾斯麥先生說。
Made aware of both The Times’s and the Environmental Investigation Agency’s findings, Erik Solheim, head of the United Nations Environment Program, which oversees the protocol, called illegal production of CFC-11 “nothing short of an environment crime which demands decisive action.”
聯(lián)合國環(huán)境規(guī)劃署(United Nations Environment Program)負(fù)責(zé)人埃里克·索爾海姆(Erik Solheim)在了解了《紐約時報》和美國環(huán)境調(diào)查機(jī)構(gòu)的調(diào)查結(jié)果后，稱CFC-11的非法生產(chǎn)是“一種需要采取果斷行動的環(huán)境犯罪”。
“At the same time, we have to dig deeper,” Mr. Solheim said in a statement. “Based on the scale of detected emissions there is good reason to believe the problem extends beyond these uncovered cases.”
“與此同時，我們必須深入挖掘，”索爾海姆在一份聲明中說。“基于檢測到的排放規(guī)模，我們有充分的理由相信，問題不僅局限于這些被發(fā)現(xiàn)的案例。”
The Chinese Ministry of Ecology and Environment did not respond to questions about regulation of ozone-damaging chemicals and illegal output, and said it was preparing a response. Hu Jianxin, a professor at Peking University who studies such chemicals and advises policymakers, said he and other experts needed time to check the findings and track down possible sources in China and elsewhere.
中國環(huán)境保護(hù)部沒有回應(yīng)關(guān)于監(jiān)管破壞臭氧的化學(xué)品和非法排放的問題，表示它正在準(zhǔn)備做出回應(yīng)。北京大學(xué)研究這種化學(xué)物質(zhì)并為政策制定者提供建議的教授胡建信表示，他和其他專家需要時間核實(shí)這些調(diào)查結(jié)果，在中國和其他地方追蹤可能的來源。
“Illegal production and use of CFCs can of course contribute to the atmospheric concentrations,” Professor Hu said. But, he added, the jump in emissions indicated by the latest study also meant there may be new sources that had not been considered before.
“非法生產(chǎn)和使用氯氟烴肯定會導(dǎo)致大氣濃度升高，”胡教授說。不過，他也表示，最新研究發(fā)現(xiàn)的排放量激增也意味著，可能存在之前沒考慮過的新來源。
Over the past decade, Chinese Communist Party leaders have come to see smog, tainted water and other pollution as serious threats to trust in the government. The government has made strides in curbing smog and slowing the growth of emissions of carbon dioxide and other planet-warming gases. Likewise, since announcing the ban on CFC-11, China has demanded that companies switch to less harmful chemicals.
在過去十年里，中國共產(chǎn)黨領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人已經(jīng)開始將霧霾和水污染等視為對政府信任的嚴(yán)重威脅。中國政府在治理霧霾以及減緩二氧化碳等溫室氣體的排放增長方面取得了很大進(jìn)展。同樣地，自從宣布禁止使用CFC-11以來，中國已經(jīng)要求企業(yè)改用危害性較小的化學(xué)品。
But officials and traders said it was a seesaw battle. Many polluters are small factories that slip through the net of inspections or treat fines and shutdowns as just the price of business.
但官員和商人們表示，這是一場拉鋸戰(zhàn)。許多污染企業(yè)都是小工廠，很容易鉆監(jiān)管網(wǎng)絡(luò)的空子，或者只是將罰款和停工視為生意的代價。
“On the one hand, 11 is cheaper, and on the other, its foaming effect is better,” said Ge Changqing, a manager for a legitimate chemical company, referring to CFC-11. “The demand is there downstream and local governments turn a blind eye. There’s money to be made.”
“一方面，11更便宜，另一方面，它的起泡效果更好，”一家合法化學(xué)公司的經(jīng)理葛長青(音)在提到CFC-11時說。“但下游有需求，地方政府睜一只眼閉一只眼。他們需要掙錢。”
The illicit producers often set up in isolated sites, sometimes protected by local cadres unaware of, or indifferent to, the risks.
非法生產(chǎn)企業(yè)往往設(shè)立在與外界隔離的場所，有時受到當(dāng)?shù)馗刹勘Ｗo(hù)，他們不知道環(huán)境風(fēng)險，或?qū)χ魂P(guān)心。
“These businesses are often out of the way, don’t have commercial registration, and don’t even have a name for their factories,” Mr. Liu, the expert on refrigeration chemicals, said in a presentation to officials last year. “Some of them regularly move, making it very difficult for the acting agencies to exercise oversight.”
“這些企業(yè)往往地處偏遠(yuǎn)，無工商登記，甚至無廠名，”化學(xué)制冷劑專家劉樂去年在向官員們的陳述中說，“有的還定期搬遷，給職能部門的監(jiān)管帶來很大困難。”
There have been successes. In 2015, officials said that Shandong had shut 15 illegal makers of CFC-11 and a similar banned chemical since 2013, and that two people in the trade had been convicted.
也有成功的例子。2015年，官員們表示，自2013年以來，山東已查封了15家非法生產(chǎn)CFC-11以及其他類似違禁化學(xué)品的企業(yè)，兩名交易者被定罪。
Sometimes the closed plants have been sizable. Over just four months, one of those shut in 2015 made over 300 tons of an illegal ozone-destroying chemical often used as a coolant. Another, shut in 2012, made 1,100 tons of CFC-11 in 11 months and dumped toxic waste, causing a die-off at nearby fish farms, according to a court verdict.
有時被關(guān)閉的工廠規(guī)模很大。2015年查封的一家工廠在僅僅四個月的時間里就生產(chǎn)了300多噸用作冷卻劑的破壞臭氧層2的非法化學(xué)品。根據(jù)法庭裁決書，2012年查封的另一個工廠在11個月的時間里生產(chǎn)了1100噸CFC-11，并傾倒了有毒廢料，導(dǎo)致附近養(yǎng)魚場的水產(chǎn)全部死亡。
But the number of Chinese factories that use polyurethane foam is daunting — Xingfu alone has around 1,700 businesses involved in making cooking and refrigeration equipment, according to the local government — and officials have said that tracking and punishing illegal chemical production is difficult.
但使用聚氨酯泡沫塑料的中國工廠數(shù)量十分驚人——根據(jù)當(dāng)?shù)卣臄?shù)據(jù)，僅興福市就有約1700家企業(yè)參與生產(chǎn)烹飪和制冷設(shè)備——官員們表示，很難追蹤和懲罰非法化學(xué)品生產(chǎn)。
“Illegal production and use is highly concealed, evidence is hard to obtain, and it’s quite difficult to crack cases,” Ms. Shao, the Shandong official, said in her report. “Among the cases of lawbreaking in recent years, only a small number of the suspects have received the punishment they deserve.”
“非法生產(chǎn)和使用具有高度隱蔽性，取證困難，案件難以偵破，”山東官員邵常盈在報告中說。“在近年來的違法案件中，只有少數(shù)嫌疑人受到應(yīng)有懲罰。”
When contacted, some online chemical traders denied selling the gas despite offering it in ads; some said their sales pages were out of date. But others said that they still sold the gas.
當(dāng)被聯(lián)系上時，網(wǎng)上一些化學(xué)品交易商否認(rèn)出售這種氣體，盡管他們在廣告中聲稱供應(yīng)它;還有些人說他們的銷售頁面已經(jīng)過時了。但也有些人表示，他們?nèi)栽诔鍪圻@種氣體。
“Using CFC-11 doesn’t necessarily mean violating the law,” said Wu Shaoji, a chemical salesman based in Shanghai. “The government doesn’t check.”
“使用CFC-11不一定違法，”上海的化學(xué)品銷售者吳紹基(音)說，“政府不檢查。”
There are hints that Chinese officials were taking action even before the scientists’ warning. In January, the government announced tighter controls on carbon tetrachloride, a chemical that can be used to make CFC-11, and ordered unlicensed companies not to sell it off as a byproduct from making other chemicals.
有跡象表明，中國官員甚至在科學(xué)家發(fā)出警告之前就已開始采取行動。1月份，中國政府宣布，對可用來生產(chǎn)CFC-11的四氯化碳實(shí)行更嚴(yán)格的控制，并責(zé)令無證公司不得將它作為生產(chǎn)其他化學(xué)品的副產(chǎn)品進(jìn)行銷售。
But paradoxically, underground demand for CFC-11 may have been partly spurred by China’s increasingly strict environmental standards. The government has demanded better insulation of buildings so they waste less energy, and that means more foam.
但矛盾的是，對CFC-11的地下需求可能在一定程度上受到中國日益嚴(yán)格的環(huán)境標(biāo)準(zhǔn)推動。政府要求對建筑物進(jìn)行更好的隔熱處理，以減少能源浪費(fèi)，那就意味著，需要更多的泡沫塑料。
At the same time, the government has tightened supplies of the main legal foam-making agent used in China, HCFC-141b, which is less harmful to the ozone layer. That chemical is scheduled to be phased out in China’s polyurethane foam sector by the end of 2025, to be replaced by even safer alternatives.
與此同時，中國政府收緊了對臭氧層危害較小的主要合法泡沫制造劑HCFC-141b的供應(yīng)。中國計劃在2025年底之前將這種化學(xué)品從聚氨酯泡沫塑料行業(yè)中淘汰出去，代之以更安全的產(chǎn)品。
But Ms. Shao, the environment official, said that the surging price of HCFC-141b had encouraged some foam makers to fall back on black-market CFC-11 instead of embracing unfamiliar, next-generation alternatives.
但環(huán)保官員邵常盈表示，HCFC-141b價格的飆升促使一些泡沫塑料產(chǎn)品制造商退回了CFC-11黑市，而不是采用陌生的下一代替代產(chǎn)品。
Factory owners in Shandong agreed.
山東的工廠主們對此表示同意。
“They’ve reduced the amount of 141b every year so we just can’t afford it,” said Fan Jingang, a chemical factory owner who said he did not use illegal chemicals and had pulled out of making foam. “Energy conservation is a national policy, but if you can’t make a legal foam agent affordable, then you can’t achieve that goal.”
“他們每年都減少141b的產(chǎn)量，所以我們買不起了，”化工廠老板范金剛(音)說。他說，他沒有使用非法化學(xué)品，也已經(jīng)不再生產(chǎn)泡沫塑料。“節(jié)能是國策，但如果合法的發(fā)泡劑都讓人買不起，那就沒法實(shí)現(xiàn)目標(biāo)。”
