Pollution responsibilty...A shared problem...

[DMikeS4321]

My GOD! Finally someone uses a 'per capita' argument... I'm stunned that the most basic logic can infiltrate CFL... and be so ignored by so many others...

 

@Jim: the lead argument is that the import restriction is because it is illegal... that's the basis of the restriction (not that it's harmful; if's only harmful if ingested to certain levels).

 

Were you waiting for someone to do this for you, David?

 

[david_dawei]

My GOD! Finally someone uses a 'per capita' argument... I'm stunned that the most basic logic can infiltrate CFL... and be so ignored by so many others...

 

@Jim: the lead argument is that the import restriction is because it is illegal... that's the basis of the restriction (not that it's harmful; if's only harmful if ingested to certain levels).

 

Were you waiting for someone to do this for you, David?

 

I've done it too many times.. and never got an open ear on that approach... you surely recall... that's the past...

 

Concerning the detectable level issue.. and it differs by country and what they detect differs as well... I keep reading the US and China are both refusing each others stuff since the one doesn't allow this and the other doesn't allow that...

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

My GOD! Finally someone uses a 'per capita' argument... I'm stunned that the most basic logic can infiltrate CFL... and be so ignored by so many others...

 

@Jim: the lead argument is that the import restriction is because it is illegal... that's the basis of the restriction (not that it's harmful; if's only harmful if ingested to certain levels).

 

Were you waiting for someone to do this for you, David?

 

I've done it too many times.. and never got an open ear on that approach... you surely recall... that's the past...

 

Concerning the detectable level issue.. and it differs by country and what they detect differs as well... I keep reading the US and China are both refusing each others stuff since the one doesn't allow this and the other doesn't allow that...

 

News and News Editorials are not well watched because most of the public would rather see what Brittany Spears and Paris Hilton are doing. You have to post something that gets people's attention. Perhaps rewarding them with gifts or food when they do what you want?

 

Edited October 26, 2007 by ShaQuaNew (see edit history)

[SirLancelot]

Speak of the devil:

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071026/sc_af...zaBlxuUq16s0NUE

 

China to spend 14 billion dollars on polluted lake clean-up

 

by Verna Yu 1 hour, 24 minutes ago

 

BEIJING (AFP) - China will invest 14 billion dollars to clean up its third-largest freshwater lake, which has been devastated by the unchecked waste from factories, state media and an official said Friday.

 

Over the next five years, east China's Jiangsu province will spend 108.5 billion yuan (14.4 billion dollars) on improving water quality in the Taihu Lake and nearby tributaries, a local environmental protection bureau said. "Yes, there is such a plan," said the official, confirming the news reports, but he declined to give his name and refused to elaborate.

 

The situation in Taihu lake, once renowned for its scenic beauty, came to a head in late May when an algae bloom contaminated water supplies for several days for more than 2.3 million people in the nearby city of Wuxi.

 

At least they're making an effort. 108.5 billion yuan is quite a bit of money for the common citizenry. That's a substantial investment. I hope it's well spent.

[DMikeS4321]

My GOD! Finally someone uses a 'per capita' argument... I'm stunned that the most basic logic can infiltrate CFL... and be so ignored by so many others...

 

@Jim: the lead argument is that the import restriction is because it is illegal... that's the basis of the restriction (not that it's harmful; if's only harmful if ingested to certain levels).

 

Were you waiting for someone to do this for you, David?

 

I've done it too many times.. and never got an open ear on that approach... you surely recall... that's the past...

 

Concerning the detectable level issue.. and it differs by country and what they detect differs as well... I keep reading the US and China are both refusing each others stuff since the one doesn't allow this and the other doesn't allow that...

 

I don't remember, but I'm sure I just missed it. You are absolutely right; per capita comparisons are the only valid comparisons in most areas.

 

Don't you always feel like we're being manipulated? I'm no conspiracy buff, but I swear that I detect a concerted "campaign" to dump on China. A couple of days ago I heard a breathless report during the BUSINESS update of all things; seems 'Babies-R-Us' or somebody here in the U.S. was importing some "Cars (the movie)" licensed clothing from who knows where and there were little "Cars" pieces, like game pieces, attached to the clothing. OOOHHHHHH!!!!! Seems children can SWALLOW the little game pieces. For SHAME, the pieces were manufactured in CHINA!!!!!!! No further mention of the CLOTHING, but the 'business expert' was sure to tell us that it was those evil Chinese who had made the pieces.

 

WTF???

 

P.T. Barnum: "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people". I hope P.T. was wrong. I hope whoever did the 'estimating' in this case goes belly up, yesterday.

Edited October 26, 2007 by DMikeS4321 (see edit history)

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

My GOD! Finally someone uses a 'per capita' argument... I'm stunned that the most basic logic can infiltrate CFL... and be so ignored by so many others...

 

@Jim: the lead argument is that the import restriction is because it is illegal... that's the basis of the restriction (not that it's harmful; if's only harmful if ingested to certain levels).

 

Were you waiting for someone to do this for you, David?

 

I've done it too many times.. and never got an open ear on that approach... you surely recall... that's the past...

 

Concerning the detectable level issue.. and it differs by country and what they detect differs as well... I keep reading the US and China are both refusing each others stuff since the one doesn't allow this and the other doesn't allow that...

 

I don't remember, but I'm sure I just missed it. You are absolutely right; per capita comparisons are the only valid comparisons in most areas.

 

Don't you always feel like we're being manipulated? I'm no conspiracy buff, but I swear that I detect a concerted "campaign" to dump on China. A couple of days ago I heard a breathless report during the BUSINESS update of all things; seems 'Babies-R-Us' or somebody here in the U.S. was importing some "Cars (the movie)" licensed clothing from who knows where and there were little "Cars" pieces, like game pieces, attached to the clothing. OOOHHHHHH!!!!! Seems children can SWALLOW the little game pieces. For SHAME, the pieces were manufactured in CHINA!!!!!!! No further mention of the CLOTHING, but the 'business expert' was sure to tell us that it was those evil Chinese who had made the pieces.

 

WTF???

 

P.T. Barnum: "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people". I hope P.T. was wrong. I hope whoever did the 'estimating' in this case goes belly up, yesterday.

 

Just as there is no vast right wing conspiracy, there is no concerted campaign to dump on China. There are however a number of posts that take the time to present the negative aspect of something about China (e.g., pollution, human rights, etc.) that neglect to compare her changes with what is currently happening, or has happened in other countries dealing with similar problems. The height of arrogancy is to push or expect change on some sort of schedule. China recognizes many of it's problems and is simply not receptive to being pushed into change.

 

Personally, I'm accepting of any post that it critical of a countries direction or action. I define bashing as being unaccepting of addressing what is being done, rather than what is not being done.

[david_dawei]

My GOD! Finally someone uses a 'per capita' argument... I'm stunned that the most basic logic can infiltrate CFL... and be so ignored by so many others...

 

@Jim: the lead argument is that the import restriction is because it is illegal... that's the basis of the restriction (not that it's harmful; if's only harmful if ingested to certain levels).

 

Were you waiting for someone to do this for you, David?

 

I've done it too many times.. and never got an open ear on that approach... you surely recall... that's the past...

 

Concerning the detectable level issue.. and it differs by country and what they detect differs as well... I keep reading the US and China are both refusing each others stuff since the one doesn't allow this and the other doesn't allow that...

 

I don't remember, but I'm sure I just missed it. You are absolutely right; per capita comparisons are the only valid comparisons in most areas.

 

Don't you always feel like we're being manipulated? I'm no conspiracy buff, but I swear that I detect a concerted "campaign" to dump on China. A couple of days ago I heard a breathless report during the BUSINESS update of all things; seems 'Babies-R-Us' or somebody here in the U.S. was importing some "Cars (the movie)" licensed clothing from who knows where and there were little "Cars" pieces, like game pieces, attached to the clothing. OOOHHHHHH!!!!! Seems children can SWALLOW the little game pieces. For SHAME, the pieces were manufactured in CHINA!!!!!!! No further mention of the CLOTHING, but the 'business expert' was sure to tell us that it was those evil Chinese who had made the pieces.

 

WTF???

 

P.T. Barnum: "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people". I hope P.T. was wrong. I hope whoever did the 'estimating' in this case goes belly up, yesterday.

 

Just as there is no vast right wing conspiracy, there is no concerted campaign to dump on China. There are however a number of posts that take the time to present the negative aspect of something about China (e.g., pollution, human rights, etc.) that neglect to compare her changes with what is currently happening, or has happened in other countries dealing with similar problems. The height of arrogancy is to push or expect change on some sort of schedule. China recognizes many of it's problems and is simply not receptive to being pushed into change.

and the reason for this is back to what you said.. the media decides what we get to read (jeez.. sounds a bit like china after all)...

 

If one wants to stay abreast of chinese new in a more complete way, they can refer to the list of online links I've already provided. There's alot being done around the whole world that most of us know nothing about...

[Don]

Maybe i will wade in here with a few observations. I do not think any one source tells the truth. We must look at many sources and look for the comon threads. I find my friends here a good source of where i should look for those threads. Plus, i find the analysis here useful.

 

I am very happy that Jim posted the info from his study. I wish it would be published and i feel if it was really looked at critically, it could help china a lot. We must remember that many of the things Jim spoke about are not acute, like food poising, but build over time. Many of these pollutants bioaccumlate especially in fat. The problems might not even show in this generation of people.

 

I do know that others including my old company are building large chemical production facilities in china and they follow US law and standards. The products made in China by these companies will be cost competative with the products made by china's local companies. These chinese local companies could make cleaner plants for little to no cost increase. In fact following US standards the chemical industry is one of the most competative in the world, unitl Natural gas went thru the ceiling. Now most raw materials plants are being placed in Saudi, or Kuwait. Clean technology does not always cost more, it just means people have to be flexible and try new things. We can make many chemical plants very clean by internal recycling and other tech. In fact many wastes streams can be reused to make useful products thus saving money. People just need to look father ahead.

 

One negative not spoken about here yet is that if china did not make these products at the cost Walmart wanted than Walmart would be in Vietnam or some where else looking for the lowest cost. We have said that china has a choice to make these products, but what is the choice really. Feed your children or pollute the country. I say that only because they have not really bought into the clean tech yet.

 

China still has not really seen the light on clean tech. Many industries have draged their heels on adpating new technologies and they suffered as new companies took their market share. Clean tech applied as it is developed does work, just look at how much the US chemical industry has cleaned up. It did not really cost more to do this, but it did change things and made them look at alternative ways of grouping plants. China tried to add a cost for environmental damage to their govenors records, but it was rejected since most places showed no growth. China is just finding out that doing this damage will cost them, much better to be clean early.

 

I have rambles a little, but i hope it adds a little to this discussion.

[rogerluli]

14.5 BILLION DOLLARS to clean up Lake Tai... Hopefully examples like this of how hugely expensive reversing the effects of pollution are will make people in China realize that pollution is too expensive to ignore. Nothing is more critical to life than air and water and since water pollution control is my business I know how expensive it is and what an investment the US has made in it. It will take China many decades to reach the point we are at in the US today. Hopefully they will decide it is worth it to do. Pollution is very much like the old commercial, "you can pay me now, or you can pay me later..."

 

The second time I went to Guangzhou to visit laopo we spent a day looking at housing developments. We toured one especially beautiful penthouse model apartment. The top floor in a 15 story building it was very well finished with obviously expensive materials. Then I walked out on the porch and there was a view down to a very polluted arm of the Pearl River and above it the grey, polluted air of GZ... I didn't snap that one up... Although in retrospect I'm sure I would have probably at least doubled my money in the intervening years as property in GZ has gone up and up. But for me you still have to live there and I can't abide seeing that every day. So we only bought in places where the air and water was good NOW...

We watched a feature on Shanghai TV about this lake just a few days ago...

 

 

China spending billions to clean lake

Algae bloom had blocked water supplies to millions of people in summer

BEIJING - China has announced a multibillion-dollar plan to clean up a severely polluted lake where an algae bloom forced the suspension of water supplies to millions of people this summer.

 

The $14.5 billion plan to clean up Lake Tai, in a densely populated area northwest of Shanghai, should take five years, said a statement dated Friday and posted on a government Web site of the nearby city of Taizhou.

 

The move comes amid mounting official urgency about curbing chronic pollution in China¡¯s rivers and lakes that has left millions of people without clean water and disrupted city water systems.

 

Blamed on pollution

Lake Tai is one of a series of lakes where blooms of blue-green algae blamed on pollution have disrupted water supplies this year. Some types of the algae can produce dangerous toxins.

 

¡°The plan will control the eutrophication of Lake Tai in five years and realize the clear improvement of water quality,¡± the government statement said. ¡°In another eight to 10 years, the problem of the Lake Tai water pollution will be basically resolved.¡±

 

The algae bloom on Lake Tai in June prompted the suspension of running water in and around the major city of Wuxi for six days, forcing as many as 5 million people to rely on bottled water.

 

The algae covered as much as one-third of Lake Tai, a popular tourist attraction that has become badly polluted as the Wuxi area developed into a center for manufacturing and high technology.

 

Regulators responded by ordering the mass closure of chemical plants that dumped waste into the lake.

 

The pollution of Lake Tai has been politically sensitive for local authorities. An environmentalist who spent years collecting water samples from Lake Tai and warning about rising pollution was sentenced to prison in August on charges that he blackmailed polluters. His supporters said the charges were retaliation for his activism.

 

Others suffered algae blooms

Other lakes that suffered algae blooms this year included Chao in eastern China and Dianchi near the southwestern city of Kunming. There was no immediate word on possible cleanup plans for those lakes.

 

Environmental regulators say China¡¯s rivers and lakes are so polluted that tens of millions of people have no access to clean drinking water.

 

The deputy director the State Environmental Protection Administration said in July that one-quarter of the length of China¡¯s seven major rivers is so dirty that even touching the water can be harmful to the skin.

 

The agency imposed a moratorium on new industrial development in 13 locations along four major rivers to prevent additional pollution.

 

State media regularly report incidents in which cities are forced to temporarily suspend running water due to chemicals in lakes or rivers from pollution or industrial accidents.

 

Lower-level authorities often are accused of failing to enforce environmental rules or even blocking regulators in order to protect local businesses. Regulators complain that factories ignore orders to close or bar inspectors.

[SinoTexas]

We obviously have the "experts" to solve China's environmental problems right here on this thread. I'll leave ya'll to it.

 

It's a beautiful and clear fall day and I'm going with my daughter hunting for the $100 hamburger.

 

As aye,

 

Jim

Edited October 27, 2007 by SinoTexas (see edit history)

[Dan R]

We obviously have the "experts" to solve China's environmental problems right here on this thread. I'll leave ya'll to it.

 

It's a beautiful and clear fall day and I'm going with my daughter hunting for the $100 hamburger.

 

As aye,

 

Jim

 

 

Well this has been a very interesting and thoughtful thread.

 

Jim sounds like you have the best solution. I hope you find that burger.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

I do know that others including my old company are building large chemical production facilities in china and they follow US law and standards. The products made in China by these companies will be cost competative with the products made by china's local companies. These chinese local companies could make cleaner plants for little to no cost increase. In fact following US standards the chemical industry is one of the most competative in the world, unitl Natural gas went thru the ceiling. Now most raw materials plants are being placed in Saudi, or Kuwait.

 

 

Clean technology does not always cost more, it just means people have to be flexible and try new things. .

 

The market is the core of the issue. Dirty water, dirty air, dangerous goods used in products will all determine what will be done. A few whiny folks hanging out on the bow of a ship waving banners make noise and have no effect. Their banners and antics may make it to the newspapers, but in the end, it's the people buying property and product that determine change.

 

People that don't like living in cesspools, tend not to buy a house on top of one. Reputable and credible products and companies rise to the top. Blind trust will get you what you deserve. Reading and learning from a variety of sources will provide you more options and more negotiating power.

 

China is slow, but is working to improve. Right now, just about everything is a good buy in China. The water and land now polluted will one day be clean and pristene, in the same way it was done in other countries. It may not happen in our lifetime, but it will happen. For now, I have no desire to live on a stinky river in a city with stinky air. A few miles away, the air is cleaner. Go there first.

[SinoTexas]

We obviously have the "experts" to solve China's environmental problems right here on this thread. I'll leave ya'll to it.

 

It's a beautiful and clear fall day and I'm going with my daughter hunting for the $100 hamburger.

 

As aye,

 

Jim

 

 

Well this has been a very interesting and thoughtful thread.

 

Jim sounds like you have the best solution. I hope you find that burger.

We did Dan and it was great sharing that $100 hamburger with my daughter and Jiangyi. "Hunting for the $100 hamburger" is an aviation term my daughter taught me.

 

As aye,

 

Jim