New Explanation of the Scientific Concept of Development
文/壮歌德 （John Coulter） 翻译/王卓妮
中国正在开辟一条理解和调整经济发展的新道路。新一代的科学家汲取了世界各国的发展经验，避免了错误策略，更明智地应用现代科学的精华来整体解决环境和经济问题。中国1979年以来取得的成就在很大程度上来说是一种奇迹，在世界历史上前所未有，中国创记录般的发展赋予其自身以权利和需要，对什么是发展和该如何发展给以崭新的视角。中国《国民经济和社会发展“十一五”规划》记录了全国人民代表大会中央委员会提议采纳科学发展观的战略思想。
发展和力争提高生产的观念，只不过是250年前欧洲工业革命的产物。关注GDP则来源于美国20世纪30年代国家收入调查的试行。这种思路令人兴奋之处在于，它可以监督微观经济个体和企业的收入，并把它们加入到宏观经济情景之中。货币收入等价于生产的产品和服务，从而一国“生产总值”的数额成为衡量财富和福利的简易指标。没有人会拒绝收入增长的吸引。
发展是欧洲工业革命开辟的道路，这条路上，有先进的技术、不断萌芽的科学和信息知识，还有适当的经济解释和分析。这条道路基本是线性上升的趋势，一旦发展道路被科学总结出来，追求发展的国家就会开始相互竞争，争相希望能照搬或超越经济合作与发展组织（OECD）国家的道路。这方面已有著名的成功案例，但是它们在规模和人口密度上，都无法和中国相比。
两个世纪前，经济学的基础被抛弃，当时人们科学地发明了蒸汽机并解释了倒U型抛物线的前半段，即使到了今天，现代经济学界似乎都无法很好地解释这些，有时候也就成了晚间新闻中政客们所津津乐道的话题。但是科学发展至今，的确产生了许多新思想，如原子、能源和热力学定律等。但在这约200年的经济发展中，甚至在曾经是经济辉煌的英国工业城市，所涉及的范围如此有限，以至于当时最具影响力的经济学家这样写道：所有资源都是自然馈赠的礼物，取之不尽、用之不竭。英国所发现的，以及其他OECD国家所照搬的，都是这样一个理念：自然资源的供给链——自然的礼物——可以在全球延伸。从原料到市场销售的精细产品，倘若过程中产生废物，那也是无意的——如损害，或者是偶然的——这又被经济学家们定义为“外部性”。随着生产过程逐渐“污化”，将污染型工业出口就成为理性经济学。
《增长的极限》和《寂静的春天》的出版，使环境问题在20世纪60年代受到关注。老鹰乐队的歌曲“最后的家园”，其歌词追溯了从旧世界、美国东海岸到西海岸，之后开发夏威夷群岛最后一片净土的发展历程，歌词在最后唱道，“我们一定要坚守这片净土，因为再也没有新的疆域。”
西进开发真正结束于亚洲，中国自1980年以来从中获益匪浅。但是31年前老鹰乐队歌词敲响了警钟：再也没有新的疆域。这并不是指地理疆域，而是技术创新和科学新境界。最为贴切的说法是，科学成就必须融入经济发展的崭新概念之中。
物料平衡是指系统输入输出相平衡，它是以热力学第一定律为条件，即物质和能量不能被创造也不能被毁灭，只会从一种形式转化为另一种形式。一吨煤燃烧释放出热能，而热能可以转化为电能。物质平衡探索煤的去向，煤和空气中的氧燃烧，产生1600千克的二氧化碳。中国2006年燃烧了20亿吨的煤。物质平衡理论告诉我们这并不是所谓的偶然“外部性”。
作为反馈，传统经济学勉强提出每吨7美元的碳交易价格，但这还不足以解决中国当前正在发生的事情。其实物质平衡理论并不神秘，它是由克尼斯（Allen Kneese）所开创的环境监督方法。倘若废物并不是随处可见，并没有像现在这样广泛地散落在地球上，那么，物质平衡就出现得不合时机，发达经济可以置之不理。事实上，物质平衡的理论是正确的，是显而易见的真理。
然而，这仅仅是中国科学评估发展的第一步。热力学第二定律表述为，无论何种转化，要是考虑周围情况（如环境），转化结果使能量削减，也就是物理中提到的无序、混乱和高熵。清华大学环境科学和工程系石磊教授和他的研究生参观了农村地区的铁高炉。农村地区铁高炉每年为国家产铁3.5亿吨。产出的经济价值让企业受益，但是，同时也产生了大量有害的热气、蒸汽和固体物，它们对远近社区产生了不可避免的影响，现在已延伸到中国内部地区，以及朝鲜半岛、日本甚至美洲。能量流的轨迹，以及其他更具体的形式如有效能和熵，都指向了效率，形成了循环经济的原则——减量化、再利用和再循环。
北京师范大学化学院的方德彩教授运用了创新的物质成分分析方法，设计出合适形状和功能的分子来实现人体组织细胞的对接和修复。这种方法同时也可用于工程建设，它可以用来设计拥有独特性质的物质分子。这种方法是由多伦多麦克马斯特大学的Richard Bader教授发明的，方教授正是师从贝得（Bader）教授门下。2007年，他的最新发现是，运用现代计算机的速度可以赋予该方法将分子间图像放大或缩小的潜力，比如冶炼成铁的铁矿石分子，那么从宏观角度看，即从地区、国家和全球的角度来看高炉中的铁矿石分子，它就是生产中的污染。这种铁矿石分子的三维轮廓图（2个铁原子与3个氧原子相互重叠）说明了如何才能有效地破坏分子间力来获得纯铁并释放氧气。与延续了几千年的古老炼铁方法（即盲目地将铁矿石加热到1600度的过程中，氧与碳结合释放出二氧化碳）相比，运用这种观点进行低温冶炼也是可行的。作为一种模拟，这种极小的科学力量无需动用太多力量就能直接产生同样的效果。Tim Sylow，主管澳大利亚必和必拓集团（世界最大矿业集团之一）的全球铁矿石营销，并且具有高炉工程和热动力学背景的专家，在清华大学的一次革新研究会议上宣称，这一技术将是工业史上的圣杯。
这些概念将科学的严密性带入了环境正负外部性的定价当中。物质平衡能计算出精确数量的同时，熵分析和现代化学可以计算出损害的严重程度，它们不是为了处罚污染行为而猜测罚金，或者随意指定一个废物交易的价格。客观结果类似于司机酒精测试，而不是猜测、掩藏和直接的否定。
回顾欧洲工业革命以来250年的经济发展历程以及相关的经济学解释，所得到的绝对结论是微观经济对宏观经济并没有帮助。也就是说对于个人或公司而言，有利可图的并不是最适合整个国家或全球经济。就像一门手艺，能一边在自家院内刺激产品生产，一边却在别人的后院堆放垃圾。全面发展的要求目前已经进入中国共产党党章修正草案之中。随着全过程核算，熵分析以及分子图谱定位的新一轮科学思潮的出现，将可以从微观原子水平直到全球环境层次来看工业的进展，而且进展会越来越多。具有讽刺意义的是，从现代科学的角度，我们认为中国已经处于理想状态很长时间——就是人类活动与自然和谐相处的状态。
熵——从工程学到经济学
熵是科学中的重要概念，它区分了自发（自然）活动与人为活动或引发的活动。某些活动似乎否定了这条规则，但是科学可以解释，部分环境中发生逆熵是可能的，但是作为整体是不可能发生的。 这张图来自Atkins的经典教科书《化学原理》，该图表明，在屏幕背后，工程方法如何解决看似否定熵规则的自发活动。
其在经济学中应用广泛。比如，雨是天然的，但是灌溉需要工程，这通常被认可而且工程确实耗费了成本。然而，随着发展压力的增大，企业和国家强调产品的生产，从而倾向于隐藏背后的成本。在极端例子中，拉斯维加斯壮观的喷泉，或者号称“零排放”的汽车都只是在部分的状况下成立，因为作为整体，科学表明净熵必然不可避免地增加。有些事情发生在视野之外。电就是一个鲜明的例子，它为城市提供照明和运作，提供了房间中的空调。但是远在城市之外，产生电能的电站所产生的熵，比转化于电梯运行及其它城市运行活动的熵要多。熵是一个科学可测量的实体，而数学从不说谎。
简历
壮歌德博士(Dr.John Coulter)，早年获澳大利亚Griffith大学亚洲经济发展学士学位、澳大利亚国立大学数量经济学硕士学位，1991年获Griffith大学经济发展博士学位，专攻中国经济与环境问题，是国际生态经济学会创始人之一。
What China has achieved since 1979 is a miracle unprecedented in world history, and will be viewed as such centuries from now. China’s record-breaking development requires us to take a fresh look at what development means and how it should be achieved.
In this respect, the 11th Five-Year Plan (2006-10) is the practical application of the scientific concept of development put forward by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China.
Professors Shi Lei of Tsinghua University, Ma Zhong of Renmin University of China and Fang Decai of Beijing Normal University are examples of younger scientists who have seen what the scientific world has to offer and are now reshaping it to fit China’s development experience. Their ambitions have a fascinating rationale.
The idea of progress, and a desire for increased production was only formalized in the industrial revolution in Europe 250 years ago. A focus on gross domestic product originated from the US government’s commissioning of a survey of national income in the 1930s.
It was an exciting idea to monitor the incomes of individuals and firms in microeconomics and add them to a macroeconomic scenario. Income in monetary terms equals the value of goods and services produced, so the “gross product” of a nation became a shorthand index of wealth and wellbeing. Who would deny the attraction of increased incomes?
Development has been characterized as a “pathway” pioneered by European industrialization, accompanied by improved technologies and a burgeoning of science and technology, and appropriate economic explanations and analysis. The pathway is basically linear and upwards, tending to plateau off on achievement of development.
Once this trajectory science was formalized in graphs, the race was on with aspiring nations hoping to copy or eclipse the paths of the world’s most developed economies. There have been some notable successes, but nothing on the scale and sustained intensity of China.
The foundations of economics were laid down two centuries ago when science was inventing steam engines and explaining the parabola of projectiles, and the metaphors are still there in modern economics. But science has come a long way thanks to the new ideas of atoms, energy and thermodynamic laws.
The scale of economic activity 200 years ago, even in English industrial cities noted for their spectacular production, was so small that the most influential economist of the time wrote that any gifts of nature that existed in boundless quantities were free. What the United Kingdom discovered, and other economically advanced nations copied, was that the supply chain to access natural resources – these “gifts of nature” – could be extended globally.
In getting from raw materials to fine marketable products, if there was some waste along the way, this was unintended – like a nuisance, or merely accidental – and was later labeled by economists as an “externality”. When production processes got really messy, exporting smokestack industries was regarded as rational economics.
Environmental concerns took hold in the 1960s, encapsulated by authors in Limits of Growth and Silent Spring. The Eagles’ Last Resort lyrics traces development from the “old world” to the US east coast, then to the west coast and out to the westernmost pristine island of the Hawaii chain, concluding that “we have got to make it here, there is no new frontier”.
The trend westward in development really ends in Asia, and China has benefited hugely since the early 1980s. But 31 years on, The Eagles’ lyrics ring true: There are no new frontiers. At least there are not geographically, but there are in terms of technical innovation and scientific understanding.
Most pertinently, what has been gained in science has to be incorporated into fresh concepts of economic development.
Professor Ma, dean of Environment at Renmin University of China, is an expert on Material Balance. This is the science that says what goes in must come out, and is formally termed the First Law of Thermodynamics – matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed, only changed to other forms.
A ton of coal burns to give off heat, and that can be converted to electricity. Material Balance asks where the coal went. The answer is that, after combusting with oxygen from the air, it became 1,600 kg of carbon dioxide. And China burnt 2 billion tons in 2006.
Material Balance teaches that this is not some incidental “externality”.
The response from conventional economics – to suggest an arbitrary $7 per ton trading price on carbon – is just not good enough to deal with what is happening in China now. Material Balance is no mystery, and was pioneered as an environmental monitoring approach by Allen Kneese, under whom Professor Ma studied.
It is just that it is indeed an inconvenient truth, and could be dismissed by developed economies if the waste was elsewhere, and while it was not on the global scale it is today. Professor Ma and his colleagues are advising China’s planners and policymakers, and educating an army of bright young people, to whom Material Balance is now an obvious truth.
This is only the first step in terms of China’s scientific reappraisal of development. The Second Law of Thermodynamics sets out that in any change, if we take into account the surroundings (i.e. the environment) the net result is “worse off”, also referred to in physics as disorder, chaos, and high entropy.
At Tsinghua University, the Faculty of Environmental Science and Engineering, Professor Shi Lei is pioneering Industrial Ecology. Professor Shi and his postgrads visit iron blast furnaces at rural regional sites, which are contributing to the country’s annual steel output of 350 million tons. The dollar value of output is good for the enterprise – but it pours out huge amounts of harmful gases, vapors and solids that can be monitored as undeniably bad for the wider community, now extending across China, the Korean Peninsula, Japan, and even America.
Tracking flows of energy, and the more specific forms classed as energy and entropy, points to efficiencies, guiding us toward reducing, reusing and recycling in a circular economy.
Professor Fang Decai of the Chemistry Faculty at Beijing Shifan University uses a method of analyzing the composition of matter that is so revolutionary that its benefits are now being accepted to intelligently design molecules of the right shape and function to “dock” with human cells and fix them. The method can also design molecules of matter of desired extraordinary characteristics for engineering construction.
The method was developed by Richard Bader of McMaster University, Ontario, under whom Professor Fang studied. What is new in China is that the mapping of molecules, empowered by the speed of modern computing, has the potential to zoom in and out between molecules of, for example, iron ore being refined into iron, and the macroview of a blast furnace, and in addition, to the regional, national and global perspective, pollution included.
The 3D contoured map of an iron ore molecule – two atoms of iron overlapping with three atoms of oxygen – suggests how the bonds can be efficiently broken to produce pure iron and release oxygen. Instead of the 1,000-year-old practice of blindly heating the ore to 1,600 degrees and blasting the oxygen free to bind with coke to billow off as carbon dioxide, this understanding could lead to cool refining.
As an analogy, rather than pocketing billiard balls by violently shaking the pool table, intelligent minimal force with a cue can be directed to achieve the same result. Tim Sylow, who manages global iron ore sales for BHP Billiton, and with a background in blast furnace engineering and thermodynamics, sitting in on a Tsinghua University research in progress meet, exclaimed: “That would be industry’s holy grail!”
These concepts inject rigorous science into the pricing of environmental goods. Rather than meekly guessing some small amount as a fine for some act of polluting, or whimsically designating a price to trade waste, Material Balance can calculate the exact amount, and entropy analysis and modern chemistry can calculate its severity.
The objective scores are analogous to the introduction of the breathalyzer for drunk-driving, and do away with guessing, secrecy and blustering denials.
Looking back on 250 years of economic development through the Industrial Revolution started in Europe, and the economists’ explanations of it, the stark conclusion is that microeconomics does not add up to macroeconomics – what is profitable for an individual or a firm may not be the best for the country or the globe. It is a sleight of hand to boast progress in production of “goods” while piling up “bads” in someone else’s backyard.
The call for development to be comprehensive is now embodied in the current draft amendment to the Party Constitution. With the new wave of scientific concepts incorporating total accounting, entropy analysis and molecular mapping, industrial processes can be monitored from the scale of atoms to the global environment, and the numbers add up.
Ironically, we have come round through modern science to what in China has been an ideal for a very long time – that human activity should be in harmony with nature.
The author is a researcher from Australia
(China Daily 10/17/2007 page11)
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2007-10/17/content_6182376.htm