China leading in the environment

[Topaz]

It seems only yesterday that the Tory government were saying until China and India came on board there were no sense in Canada cleaning its carbons. Now, the US and China are ahead of Canada in green tech.This is suppose to be a surprise? Not to Canadians. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100325/national/clean_energy_cda

[M.Dancer]

It seems only yesterday ....

Your title is misleading. They are no where near leading in the environment...this is about investment in technology which could, possibly produce cleaner power...and like any investment, forward looking predictions are speculative...

http://www.tmxmoney.com/en/sector_profiles/cleantech.html

[GostHacked]

It seems only yesterday that the Tory government were saying until China and India came on board there were no sense in Canada cleaning its carbons. Now, the US and China are ahead of Canada in green tech.This is suppose to be a surprise? Not to Canadians. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100325/national/clean_energy_cda

That damn they put up where it flooded an area and they had to relocate a million or so people to other areas because their towns would be completely underwater. When you can walk around Beijing without a face mask air filter, then you can say they are greener.

[waldo]

Topaz, unless the malcontent concerned with your title actually steps up to qualify that concern... in the context of your article, yes... China is most certainly leading on many fronts.

China and India were always the easy fall-back for deniers - unfortunately for deniers, both China and India have (recently) given formal acceptance to the Copenhagen 'agreement'... additionally, both China and India have agreed to report their country emissions according to the Copenhagen intervals - a most significant point of acceptance on their parts.

China has said it will try to voluntarily reduce its emissions of CO2 by 40 to 45 percent by 2020 compared with 2005 levels. India set a domestic emissions intensity reduction target of 20 to 25 percent by 2020 compared with 2005 levels. The U.S. & it's shadow, Canada, have pledged to reduce emissions by 17 percent by 2020 compared with 2005... contingent on the U.S. Congress enacting climate change and energy legislation.

China is investing heavily in renewable energy... it's introduction of wind energy has grown nearly 10 times faster than fossil fuel consumption, expanding from less than 500 megawatts of capacity in 2002 to over 12,000 megawatts in 2008. China has major wind projects moving forward including 7 that each have a capacity of 10,000 to 30,000 megawatts and together will exceed the entire world’s wind generating capacity at the start of 2008. In terms of solar, China has become the world's number one producer of solar photovoltaics (PV)... with plans for a 2000 megawatt project in the Mongolian desert that will make it the largest solar PV proposal in the world to date.

[M.Dancer]

Topaz, unless the malcontent concerned with your title actually steps up to qualify that concern... in the context of your article, yes... China is most certainly leading on many fronts.

yes...they are leading..they are the number one nation leading in C02 emmisions...And while they do not lead in water pollution....they are near the worst ranking (1 best __122 worst) 84.

http://www.unesco.org/bpi/wwdr/WWDR_chart2_eng.pdf

But apprently they lead in cleantech investment, which even a grade four SpEd graduate can see is different fromm the title...

[waldo]

yes...they are leading..they are the number one nation leading in C02 emmisions...And while they do not lead in water pollution....they are near the worst ranking (1 best __122 worst) 84.

http://www.unesco.org/bpi/wwdr/WWDR_chart2_eng.pdf

But apprently they lead in cleantech investment, which even a grade four SpEd graduate can see is different fromm the title...

so what's the real point in your grade school attempt to berate Topaz over the title... it seems you also had no trouble doing the same over one of her recent posts - something about spelling, as I recall. Are you that bereft that you need to incessantly niggle away at the trivial. Yes, you've made your point that China is now indeed #1 in emissions, having recently taken over from the U.S. in that regard. Equally, I do believe that both Topaz and I have offered suggestion that China is responding in terms of commitment, investment, innovation... and deployment of renewable solutions. What was your point, again?

[Michael Hardner]

so what's the real point in your grade school attempt to berate Topaz over the title...

It's kind of a bait-and-switch.... "Harper was just saying that China isn't green ..." and... they're not.

[M.Dancer]

Equally, I do believe that both Topaz and I have offered suggestion that China is responding in terms of commitment, investment, innovation... and deployment of renewable solutions. What was your point, again?

Yes you did offer some off topic information about future pledges that may or may not come to fruition....well done Waldo..well done!

But that in no way makes the title more descriptive of the topic.

And my comments to Topaz aren't about spelling..I'm pretty flexible when it comes to spelling....sentence structure, grammar and the ability to make yourself understood is a complete different ball of wax...and Topaz's posts in that regard are completely different.

[waldo]

It's kind of a bait-and-switch.... "Harper was just saying that China isn't green ..." and... they're not.

one scan of Topaz's linked article quickly draws the context... it really comes clear when we have Dancer assigning as, "off-topic", actions toward commitment, investment, innovation... and deployment of renewable solutions. For those, China can't be considered... what was that thread title... "leading in the environment". Those aren't a part of Dancer's dance card... apparently.

[Argus]

China and India were always the easy fall-back for deniers - unfortunately for deniers, both China and India have (recently) given formal acceptance to the Copenhagen 'agreement'...

additionally, both China and India have agreed to report their country emissions according to the Copenhagen intervals - a most significant point of acceptance on their parts.

I seem to recall that China's "agreement" was tenuous, limited, and that they threw a major hissy fit when someone proposed indepdent verification of any claims the Communist Kleptocracy makes about emissions and alleged reductions.

China is investing heavily in renewable energy...

China is investing in all sorts of technology gewgads it hopes to sell to others. It's also investing heavily in the oil sands.

it's introduction of wind energy has grown nearly 10 times faster than fossil fuel consumption,

Yes, well, when you start out with nothing it's not hard to say you're growing fast just by doing almost anything. Certainly a dollar invested in windmills is nealry

100% increase over nothing.

China has major wind projects moving forward including 7 that each have a capacity of 10,000 to 30,000 megawatts and together will exceed the entire world’s wind generating capacity at the start of 2008.

Yeah, it's nice when you don't have to worry about environmental assessments and can shoot anyone who doesn't like a wind farm going up next door. No doubt you'd prefer the same freedom here.]

[Michael Hardner]

one scan of Topaz's linked article quickly draws the context... it really comes clear when we have Dancer assigning as, "off-topic", actions toward commitment, investment, innovation... and deployment of renewable solutions. For those, China can't be considered... what was that thread title... "leading in the environment". Those aren't a part of Dancer's dance card... apparently.

Dirty Dancer dances on people's heads. That's his dance. He dances against sanctimony and pretense. He dances for all of us. He dances alone. He dances the box step.

[bjre]

The key is, no matter how good China does, it will be damned. Even if dirty things are happening in Canada everyday with only 1/40 population of China.

[M.Dancer]

Dirty Dancer dances on people's heads. That's his dance. He dances against sanctimony and pretense. He dances for all of us. He dances alone. He dances the box step.

[waldo]

Dirty Dancer dances on people's heads. That's his dance. He dances against sanctimony and pretense. He dances for all of us. He dances alone. He dances the box step.

the pin-head he continually dances on... is his own. That step is apropos as he continually boxes himself in. The dance is against his own sanctimonious and pretentious ways... but no, it would appear Morris Men do not dance alone in their fanciful and gaily moves!

despite the protestations of Argus' failed and/or dated recollection, China has fully signed on to Copenhagen - as I stated. Also, as I stated, China has accepted to the monitoring and reporting schedule as stipulated within the agreement.

[Wild Bill]

despite the protestations of Argus' failed and/or dated recollection, China has fully signed on to Copenhagen - as I stated. Also, as I stated, China has accepted to the monitoring and reporting schedule as stipulated within the agreement.

So they've signed on. <yawn> They've signed on to lots of things over the years. They say they agree to monitoring and reporting. Wow!

While they're at it, perhaps they can get the poison out of the pet food. Or their milk. Or the lead paint off all those Barbie doll accessories sold at WalMarts everywhere.

Perhaps they'll open up their search engines, maybe allow Google without censorship! I saw one of their spokesman on the tube the other day claiming the way they handle the Internet is within the standards of most other nations.

Gee, they must also be ready to start respecting intellectual property rights! All those warlords in the Chinese parliament will close up their factories where they knock off CDs, movie DVDs and the latest software offerings.

In fact, if things are as you claim they must be ready to pull all their spies out of Canada!

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2005/06/15/spies050615.html

"Two Chinese defectors say the Chinese government has a network of more than 1,000 spies and informants in Canada.

The two men were diplomats in Australia, where they are now seeking political asylum. They say Australia and other countries such as the United States have Chinese spy networks operating inside them too.

The defectors say the spies and informants have orders to disrupt the Falun Gong movement, which China calls "a dangerous cult," and to steal commercial and scientific secrets.

Chen Yongleen, the first secretary of the Chinese Consulate in Sydney, defected two weeks ago. He was followed a short time later by Hao Fengjing, a low-ranking Chinese intelligence officer."

Perhaps we should wait and see before we give them credit as you seem to want to instantly do. For such an argumentative fellow you seem amazingly trusting.

Actions speak louder than words.

Edited March 25, 2010 by Wild Bill

[waldo]

So they've signed on. <yawn> They've signed on to lots of things over the years. They say they agree to monitoring and reporting. Wow!

yes, in the context of this thread, indeed - wow!

now... contextually outside this thread, one could take the opportunity to unleash a torrent against certain members of the world community - one could do that. Or in regards to this thread and the expressed "action speaks greater than words" sentiment, one could acknowledge a commitment from any country at this point is simply that - a commitment. By the way, how are things progressing for the U.S. and it's puppet shadow, Canada... how's that 17% reduction commitment shaping up... how's the "action" coming along? In terms of real actions, demonstrated actions, Topaz and I highlighted some very significant actions taken and planned by China, particularly in terms of renewable solutions. On that same front, where's the "action" from the U.S. and it's puppet shadow, Canada?

[Wild Bill]

yes, in the context of this thread, indeed - wow!

now... contextually outside this thread, one could take the opportunity to unleash a torrent against certain members of the world community - one could do that. Or in regards to this thread and the expressed "action speaks greater than words" sentiment, one could acknowledge a commitment from any country at this point is simply that - a commitment. By the way, how are things progressing for the U.S. and it's puppet shadow, Canada... how's that 17% reduction commitment shaping up... how's the "action" coming along? In terms of real actions, demonstrated actions, Topaz and I highlighted some very significant actions taken and planned by China, particularly in terms of renewable solutions. On that same front, where's the "action" from the U.S. and it's puppet shadow, Canada?

I really don't know where's the "action". Nowhere, I hope! I've been the kid who devoured science books since kindergarten all my life. I rode the high tech wave selling microcomputer chips from their invention and sold the world's first personal computers, pre-IBM XT! I make my living with electronic repairs.

Not despite that background but BECAUSE of it, I don't buy into much of "green" premise, as regards CO2, other gases, man made global warming and other associated beliefs!

However, real or not, China is enjoying a huge advantage by only paying lip service to the environmental issues. It's a big part of why they've taken so many of our jobs. We put increased costs on domestic manufacturing in Canada and then totally ignore imported products that have no such costs.

Frankly, I think it's insane! Failing being able to waste money on "green" issues in the first place, I would support retaliatory duties and tariffs against those countries like China who do not make the same investments into cleaner manufacturing.

[waldo]

However, real or not, China is enjoying a huge advantage by only paying lip service to the environmental issues. It's a big part of why they've taken so many of our jobs. We put increased costs on domestic manufacturing in Canada and then totally ignore imported products that have no such costs.

Frankly, I think it's insane! Failing being able to waste money on "green" issues in the first place, I would support retaliatory duties and tariffs against those countries like China who do not make the same investments into cleaner manufacturing.

I'm not clear why you would label the following as "lip service":

China has said it will try to

voluntarily

reduce its emissions of CO2 by 40 to 45 percent by 2020 compared with 2005 levels.

.

.

China is investing heavily in renewable energy... it's introduction of wind energy has grown nearly 10 times faster than fossil fuel consumption, expanding from less than 500 megawatts of capacity in 2002 to over 12,000 megawatts in 2008. China has major wind projects moving forward including 7 that each have a capacity of 10,000 to 30,000 megawatts and together will exceed the entire world’s wind generating capacity at the start of 2008. In terms of solar, China has become the world's number one producer of solar photovoltaics (PV)... with plans for a 2000 megawatt project in the Mongolian desert that will make it the largest solar PV proposal in the world to date.

Topaz's link speaks to China taking the world lead in investments in clean energy - hardly "lip service". Along the same theme, this link speaks to the "China Greentech Initiative"... portions of it's 2009 report can be downloaded - one quick review of the partners and advisers should give credence to the legitimacy of the initiative... again, hardly "lip service".

past MLW climate related threads have also spoken to export/import situations, but not in the way you project a concern over a manufacturing disparity. Again, there is a reason the U.S., the world's largest consumer economy, has managed to keep it's emission levels relatively static in the face of ever increasing consumerism... the reason.... all that manufacturing related emission output has been exported by the U.S. to other nations (some of that to China). So, in effect, a portion of that increased Chinese emission level can be directly attributed to satisfying the demands of western countries, in particular the U.S., that have chosen to "export" their manufacturing base.

[Bonam]

China is also presently investing more in nuclear energy than any other nation. Dozens of reactors are under construction or soon to begin construction. China is on track to have a significant portion of its power provided through nuclear reactors. They are certainly progressing faster on this front than other nations.

[waldo]

an acknowledgment to Topaz's OP lead... where Harper Conservatives have no strong national policy aimed at, "incentivizing the use of renewable energy and establishing stronger competitive positions in the clean energy economy."

coincidentally, the Toronto Stock Exchange and Standard & Poor's launched the S&P/TSX Clean Technology Index Thursday... designed to measure the performance of TSX-listed companies that develop green technologies.

Green market squandered by Canada

Canadian business is failing to take advantage of the exploding global market for green technology, according to a study by the Conference Board of Canada.

The report — Global Climate-Friendly Trade: Canada's Chance to Clean Up — said world trade in climate-friendly technologies grew by an average of 10 per cent annually from 2002 to 2008. But it said Canada's exports in that area didn't grow at all during that period.

.

.

The trade data suggest that Canada is not deeply engaged in the global market for climate-friendly technologies," the report says. "To the degree that it is involved, it is more of a technology adopter than a technology maker

[Wild Bill]

I'm not clear why you would label the following as "lip service":

<snip>

Again, there is a reason the U.S., the world's largest consumer economy, has managed to keep it's emission levels relatively static in the face of ever increasing consumerism... the reason.... all that manufacturing related emission output has been exported by the U.S. to other nations (some of that to China). So, in effect, a portion of that increased Chinese emission level can be directly attributed to satisfying the demands of western countries, in particular the U.S., that have chosen to "export" their manufacturing base.

I label it as "lip service" 'cuz I have no confidence China will actually DO IT! Or at least, not in the manner or to the extent of what they promise today.

As for your "manufacturing" argument, China may have accepted the manufacturing business but who held a gun to their head and said they must make those products without attention to modern "green" techniques? Canadian steel makers must spend the money for scrubbers and a whole host of "clean" technologies in making their product. China spends zilch!

Is that the fault of "western countries, particularly the U.S."?

More simply, are they "dirty" because we FORCE them to be "dirty" or have they chosen to operate in such a manner because they SAVE THE EXTRA COSTS, HAVE MUCH MORE COMPETITIVELY PRICED PRODUCTS TO SELL AND MAKE A LOT MORE MONEY!

[Argus]

Topaz's link speaks to China taking the world lead in investments in clean energy - hardly "lip service".

I guess the 2 new coal fired generating plants that open every WEEK in China don't count, huh?

[waldo]

I label it as "lip service" 'cuz I have no confidence China will actually DO IT! Or at least, not in the manner or to the extent of what they promise today.

following your "action speaks more than words" sentiment, China is acting... you seem to keep ignoring the references offered to that action... to China "doing it".

As for your "manufacturing" argument, China may have accepted the manufacturing business but who held a gun to their head and said they must make those products without attention to modern "green" techniques? Canadian steel makers must spend the money for scrubbers and a whole host of "clean" technologies in making their product. China spends zilch!

Is that the fault of "western countries, particularly the U.S."?

More simply, are they "dirty" because we FORCE them to be "dirty" or have they chosen to operate in such a manner because they SAVE THE EXTRA COSTS, HAVE MUCH MORE COMPETITIVELY PRICED PRODUCTS TO SELL AND MAKE A LOT MORE MONEY!

my comment followed up on the exchange held previously in other MLW threads... mine was a reinforcement that a significant reason for the U.S. static emissions level isn't one attributed to the results of U.S. policy (obviously)... that static U.S. emissions figure reflects upon the "export" of manufacturing to other countries. I believe mine was a qualified reference to "some of that going to China"... I've not come across any estimate figures that presume to quantify that direct impact on China's emission levels. Obviously, China, the U.S... any countries with large emission levels... are fair game for criticism in how they work to reduce those levels. In the case of China, we see real actions proceeding forward... real plans on the table... and yes, real formal commitment to reduce emission levels. You may not have confidence in China meeting that formal commitment; however, can you have any confidence in the U.S. (or its lock-step follower, Canada) meeting formal commitment levels, given the failed/lacking responses to date?

[waldo]

I guess the 2 new coal fired generating plants that open every WEEK in China don't count, huh?

does your attempt to deflect against the lack of Harper Conservative response/planning... also count?

China is responding to the emission impacts of it's rapid industrialization; significant investments/commitments to nuclear, to wind, to solar... and to coal gasification emission reduction:

Dongguan IGCC Power Plant is the first phase of the total 920MW Sun State IGCC Power Project developed by Beijing Guoneng. This phase of the IGCC Power Plant will generate 120MW of electric power. It is scheduled to be commissioned by February, 2011. The second phase will be an 800MW IGCC Power Plant. It is estimated to be completed by 2012

[Wild Bill]

following your "action speaks more than words" sentiment, China is acting... you seem to keep ignoring the references offered to that action... to China "doing it".

my comment followed up on the exchange held previously in other MLW threads... mine was a reinforcement that a significant reason for the U.S. static emissions level isn't one attributed to the results of U.S. policy (obviously)... that static U.S. emissions figure reflects upon the "export" of manufacturing to other countries. I believe mine was a qualified reference to "some of that going to China"... I've not come across any estimate figures that presume to quantify that direct impact on China's emission levels. Obviously, China, the U.S... any countries with large emission levels... are fair game for criticism in how they work to reduce those levels. In the case of China, we see real actions proceeding forward... real plans on the table... and yes, real formal commitment to reduce emission levels. You may not have confidence in China meeting that formal commitment; however, can you have any confidence in the U.S. (or its lock-step follower, Canada) meeting formal commitment levels, given the failed/lacking responses to date?

I'm not ignoring your references. They simply said that China has made some promises. The only thing beyond that is a mention that they are becoming a world leader in photovoltaics. The references didn't actually state that China was using all they made. Outside of one desert installation the rest of their production might well be for export. In other words, to land in Canadian Tire for US to use and not China!

As for having confidence in the U.S. or Canada re: emission levels, our faults are not an excuse for China. Two wrongs don't make a right. That being said, I've grown up in a town with two of the biggest steel plants in the country, Stelco and Dofasco. Anyone in this town is well aware of the money and labour these plants have spent on cleaning up the waste and emissions from their operations. That alone inspires some confidence, certainly more than with China.