Climate Destruction By Proxy: Escaping The Cloud-Shadow
by John Laumer, Philadelphia on 06.11.06
This Sunday's New York Times features an in-depth story titled "Pollution From Chinese Coal Casts A Global Shadow." The Times certainly deserves credit for pointing out the toxic black cloud that, Winnie-the-Pooh-like, follows individual shoppers around the world as they search for the honey tree of sweet deals. Recommended as a background piece to climate change issues, the Times article, as well as the just-reviewed "Big Coal" book are as important as "Unintended Consequences." Counter-point: publicly traded oil companies draw the scrutiny of persons of every political stripe, while "coal" misses this sort of brand-specific attention. Lacking that link, it is little wonder that few in North America or Europe see that most of China's recent coal emissions exist for it's customers: and that would be "us".
Comprehension is low, while the hazards posed by Chinese coal consumptoin are very high indeed, and increasing. How many of us know that much of China's coal reserves are so highly burdened with sulfer, flouride, and arsenic that many people been directly poisoned through it's use in cooking? How many "consumers" ( 'proxy emitters' ) realize that Chinese power plant owners will be reluctant to add sulfer dioxide scrubbing equipment in a time of electricity shortfalls because the pollution controls "parasitize" a big portion of the electricity? How many of us feel justified in dissing the Kyoto protocol until China makes a parallel committment to mitigating greenhouse gas emissions? The truth-in-the-shadows list is long.
Lester Brown has pointed out that the present course of rapid Chinese economic growth is unsustainable. The corrolary lesson is that we "un-green" have set China upon this course through our consumption. While it is convenient and sometimes even helpful to have a commercial or national scapegoat...there is a bit of this in the constant mentioning of Exxon-Mobile as the 'bad example' among oil companies or China as the big future emitter of green house gases...to frame a good/bad choice, coal has no single corporate bad guy or nation to characterize it. We all stand alone in the global cloud-shadow, clicking away on keys made made with electricity produced as inefficiently as it was for our great-grandparents.
So, celebrate the New York Times for pointing out the cloud. Support green technology transfer to China. Buy locally-produced goods. The list of constructive things to do, too, is long. See the TreeHugger archives for a plenty more examples. There's always enough time to make the world a better place.
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Coal's Darkest Hour Comes Just Before EPAs New Dawn
- Buy Nothing Day 2008 Has a Hollow Ring
- Toyota: It's Lonely At The Top, Gets Credit Rating Lowered
- Photo Essay: Bees and Beekeepers In Crisis
I'm wondering if our unusually cloudy weather on the west coast this year has something to do with pollution from China...
When will you ignorant Americans get a life? Stop believing everything you read in the NY Times! That report is outrageously biased. So what if it interviews a Mr Wu or a Mr Wen? One local peasant out of 1.3 billion people suddenly has their views on their local environment elevated to front page news? You want me to randomly pick a disaffected American from Ohio and write the same story? Start blaming Hong Kong's cloudy weather on Californian industry?
some facts:
China is signed to Kyoto.
It does more to reduce its CO2 than the US and Canada put together.
The cloudy weather on the west coast of the USA is caused by American pollution.
CO2 emissions per person in China: 2.7 tonnes
CO2 emissions per person in the US: 20.2 tonnes (World Bank)
So who's the bad boy?
Your naive comments are based on shabby sensationalist NY Times reporting - at least get some solid source material if you're going to play environmental journalist.
" CO2 emissions per person in China: 2.7 tonnes
CO2 emissions per person in the US: 20.2 tonnes (World Bank)
So who's the bad boy? "
IF these figures are right, than James is right. Even if we multiply China's emmissions per person x4 (this would approximately correctly reflect the total polution produced by each nation) than China is still (even with old technology and relaxed emmissions laws) producing less than half of the polution that the U.S. is producing!
==== authors response follows =====
I seemingly did not effectively communicate my main point in this post: that we should not pit China against US emissions on an absolute nor on a per capita basis. China is burning this coal on our behalf: to make the stuff we buy with cheap labor and the least efficient generation technologies. These emissions stem from the US. China is our proxy.
That aside, right and wrong has a time dimension. China's present consumption and emission rates, based upon the technologies that started the US on this path 60 years ago are absolutely unsustainable, given their large and growing population, their documented tendency to using the least efficient coal plants, and very poor characteristics of native coal resources. The black cloud is just the tip of the filthy iceberg we'll experience down the road.