The thing is, China is already making significant efforts to rein in pollution and encourage conservation. And we need to recognized and applaud that as a most basic prerequisite to persuading the Chinese that we are partners in this and not pushy meddlers:
Jonathan Lash: China's Climate Change Playbook is Worth Reading
... Contrary to popular belief, China is already implementing a comprehensive energy policy that addresses climate change. While China's climate-change challenge equals the U.S. in scale, China's emissions footprint is fundamentally different. In the U.S., one-third of energy use and CO2 emissions come from transportation. In China, transport accounts for just 10 percent of emissions, and industry is the biggest contributor by far. So, Chinese policy appropriately focuses most strongly on reducing emissions from industry. China is replacing old inefficient power plants with state-of-the-art new units. It closed down more than 1,000 inefficient cement plants and hundreds of power plants last year, as well as steel mills, smelters, and glass and paper manufacturers, resulting in more efficient, less polluting industries. Over the last three years, the Chinese government has introduced a series of regulations on energy conservation, resource use, and recycling. The stance of China's leaders is that energy conservation and efficiency come first -- well before the search for new fossil fuel sources. But are these policies translating into action? It looks like they are. The "Thousand Enterprises Program" -- which forces the country's biggest companies to make specific energy-reduction commitments -- is meeting its goals. By 2010, this program will reduce China's coal consumption by 100 million metric tons, approximately 5 percent of annual CO2 emissions for China or the U.S. We will all see the results of strenuous short-term measures, such as closing power plants, staggering working hours and limiting vehicles, during the Olympics. But China also has long-term policies in place for reducing coal dependence, increasing the use of renewable energy and reducing pollution.
... Contrary to popular belief, China is already implementing a comprehensive energy policy that addresses climate change.
While China's climate-change challenge equals the U.S. in scale, China's emissions footprint is fundamentally different. In the U.S., one-third of energy use and CO2 emissions come from transportation. In China, transport accounts for just 10 percent of emissions, and industry is the biggest contributor by far. So, Chinese policy appropriately focuses most strongly on reducing emissions from industry. China is replacing old inefficient power plants with state-of-the-art new units. It closed down more than 1,000 inefficient cement plants and hundreds of power plants last year, as well as steel mills, smelters, and glass and paper manufacturers, resulting in more efficient, less polluting industries.
Over the last three years, the Chinese government has introduced a series of regulations on energy conservation, resource use, and recycling. The stance of China's leaders is that energy conservation and efficiency come first -- well before the search for new fossil fuel sources.
But are these policies translating into action? It looks like they are. The "Thousand Enterprises Program" -- which forces the country's biggest companies to make specific energy-reduction commitments -- is meeting its goals. By 2010, this program will reduce China's coal consumption by 100 million metric tons, approximately 5 percent of annual CO2 emissions for China or the U.S.
We will all see the results of strenuous short-term measures, such as closing power plants, staggering working hours and limiting vehicles, during the Olympics. But China also has long-term policies in place for reducing coal dependence, increasing the use of renewable energy and reducing pollution.
That article also references this paper:
China's Booming Energy Efficiency Industry | World Resources Institute
China's energy efficiency industry is emerging as a high growth sector with the country projected to spend as much as Rmb2.1 trillion (USD300 billion) over the next five years on products and services that cut energy use. The key drivers of this development are the Chinese government's determination to curb the country's expanding energy appetite as well as higher production and energy costs. Firms that develop cost-effective energy-saving technologies, particularly for the most energy-intensive industries, are poised to capture the opportunities. If successful, these enterprises will not only become profitable, but will also help lead China to a more sustainable energy future.
So again, if we are going to talk to China about reducing their carbon emissions and energy consumption, let's at least start off on the right foot by acknowledging and saluting them for the good things they are already doing. Cynicism is intellectual treason.
"So you say that China must do something to address climate change for any strategy to be effective? Well, they are. So why, again, do you think that [insert name of your country] - which is so much richer than China - shouldn't be pulling our weight?"
- Jake Ceterum censeo Chicago esse delendam
but wouldn't that hurt the economies of those developed countries whose companies are doing business with/in China? sure. but how can you ask China to put the environment and resource conservation before the economy if you are not willing to do so yourself? Cynicism is intellectual treason.
Their "prosperity" is to a large extent created by their non accounting of such externalities, and it is not very real (and the same goes for ours, given that we still don't pay for that pollution ourselves). In other words, the bill will come due whether they like it or not.
If the carbon price is increased throughout the world, then China's real competitive advantage should not be endangered - unless that advantage is just their willin gness to poison their own citizens in the name of growth. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
We should include taxes on imported goods reflecting the quantity of pollution and carbon emissions embedded in such imports.
I was under the impression that China had enough coal to fuel double-digit growth for plenty long enough to lift the entire country to "developed world" status.
But this article, Richard Heinberg's MuseLetter: Coal in China, if I read it right, says that China may hit peak coal in about 20 years or sooner.
In its conclusion a familiar line of argument/persuasion to get the Chinese to rein in coal consumption/carbon emissions can be discerned: proactively self-induce the pain now in a controlled fashion in order to avoid the uncontrolled crash of running into peak coal:
Richard Heinberg's MuseLetter: Coal in China | Global Public Media
If and when China ceases to have enough new energy to support continued economic growth, there are likely to be unpleasant consequences for the nation's stability. If such consequences are to be averted, the country's leadership must find ways to rein in economic growth while reducing internal social and political tensions, meanwhile investing enormous sums in non-fossil energy sources. A serious attempt to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would entail an identical prescription. It is a tall order by any standard, but serious contemplation of the alternative--which, in the worst instance, could amount to social, economic, and environmental collapse--should be bracing enough to motivate heroic efforts.
In other words, if the Chinese government imposes significant taxes on coal consumption, it will force the Chinese to make adjustments in a gradual steady manner: essentially the same strategy that we have been talking about for dealing with peak oil in the U.S., but which the U.S. did not implement. Cynicism is intellectual treason.
