China: Rich Nations Must Take Lead...

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

I know, to some it may seem like a small step, and even others may doubt the sincerity. Personally, I think this is ground-breaking.

 

China: Rich nations must take climate lead

 

BEIJING, China (AP) -- China will try to persuade rich countries at a U.N.-sponsored climate change conference that opened Friday to transfer more technology to developing countries to help them battle global warming.

 

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao speaks to Danish Climate Minister Connie Hedegaard in Beijing on Friday.

 

In a speech to open the climate change conference in Beijing, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao repeated China's long-standing belief that rich countries should take the lead in addressing climate change.

 

"It took developed countries several decades to solve the problems of saving energy and cutting emissions, while China has to solve the same problem in a relatively much shorter period. So the difficulty is unprecedented," Wen said.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/...e.ap/index.html

[Guest jin979]

I know, to some it may seem like a small step, and even others may doubt the sincerity. Personally, I think this is ground-breaking.

 

China: Rich nations must take climate lead

 

BEIJING, China (AP) -- China will try to persuade rich countries at a U.N.-sponsored climate change conference that opened Friday to transfer more technology to developing countries to help them battle global warming.

 

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao speaks to Danish Climate Minister Connie Hedegaard in Beijing on Friday.

 

In a speech to open the climate change conference in Beijing, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao repeated China's long-standing belief that rich countries should take the lead in addressing climate change.

 

"It took developed countries several decades to solve the problems of saving energy and cutting emissions, while China has to solve the same problem in a relatively much shorter period. So the difficulty is unprecedented," Wen said.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/...e.ap/index.html

 

So how has USA solved its energy an emissions problems ?

 

 

is not the USA the biggest energy taker and biggest polluter , yes

Edited November 7, 2008 by jin979 (see edit history)

[rogerluli]

Doesn't most every country have the same idea???

 

 

Let some other nation feel the pain...

 

 

There is enough finger-pointing to go around and around indefinitely...lets just hope something gets done and everyone is on board...

[Dennis143]

I know, to some it may seem like a small step, and even others may doubt the sincerity. Personally, I think this is ground-breaking.

 

China: Rich nations must take climate lead

 

BEIJING, China (AP) -- China will try to persuade rich countries at a U.N.-sponsored climate change conference that opened Friday to transfer more technology to developing countries to help them battle global warming.

 

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao speaks to Danish Climate Minister Connie Hedegaard in Beijing on Friday.

 

In a speech to open the climate change conference in Beijing, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao repeated China's long-standing belief that rich countries should take the lead in addressing climate change.

 

"It took developed countries several decades to solve the problems of saving energy and cutting emissions, while China has to solve the same problem in a relatively much shorter period. So the difficulty is unprecedented," Wen said.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/...e.ap/index.html

 

So how has USA solved its energy an emissions problems ?

 

 

is not the USA the biggest energy taker and biggest polluter , yes

Yes, the USA is the worlds greatest producer of carbon emissions. China is expected to overtake the US within 10 years.

 

The first step in having the US attempt to curb carbon emissions is to have an administration who addresses the problem and takes action. Let's hope we have one now.

[lostinblue]

As not to get political on this subject. Here is canada's answer

 

 

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0228/p04s01-wogi.html

North America gets its first carbon tax

The Canadian province of British Columbia hopes to change consumer behavior ¨C and raise revenue ¨C by taxing virtually all fossil fuels, including gasoline and home-heating fuel.

By Brad Knickerbocker

from the February 28, 2008 edition

 

E-mail a friend Print this Letter to the Editor Republish ShareThisGet e-mail alerts RSS

Reporter Brad Knickerbocker talks about a new carbon tax in the Canadian province of British Columbia.Taxing carbon-spewing machines to slow global warming certainly has an eat-your-peas aspect to it: "Trade your SUV for a hybrid or we'll make you pay!"

 

Then again, tax policy can have a huge and positive impact on individual and group behavior. In part, high cigarette taxes explain why rates of smoking among Americans have plummeted.

 

The Canadian province of British Columbia last week became the first jurisdiction in North America to enact a consumer-based tax on carbon emissions. The Vancouver Sun reported:

 

"The move was seen as a huge win by environmentalists, who depicted B.C. as a leader in taking action on climate change. 'I think this is a landmark decision in North America as far as government addressing global warming,' said Ian Bruce of the Suzuki Foundation. 'The B.C. government has decided to use one of the most powerful incentives at its disposal to reduce pollution,' he added...."

 

The goal is to raise US$1.75 billion over the next three years by taxing virtually all fossil fuels, including gasoline, diesel, natural gas, coal, propane, and home-heating fuel. It starts in July at $10 per ton of carbon emissions, rising to $30 per ton by 2012. Consumers will pay an extra 2.4 cents a liter (9 cents per US gallon) this year for gasoline, rising to 7.2 cents by 2012. Home heating oil would rise 2.8 cents a liter (10.6 cents per US gallon), going up to 8.3 cents per liter over the same period. The Globe and Mail (subscription required) reported:

 

"'It has been a dramatic turn, I think, for this province with this budget to say we're not just going to be talking about climate action,' said Finance Minister Carole Taylor. She said the strategy is to 'tax something that we know is bad for us,' and use the revenue to stimulate wide social change by providing incentives for people and businesses to become more energy efficient."

 

 

The plan is meant to be "revenue neutral," meaning that overall taxes won't climb. To compensate, corporate and personal income tax rates will drop, and low-income families will receive an annual tax credit of $100 per adult and $30 per child. To jump start the program, every resident will get a one-time payment of $100 this year. The Canadian Press reported:

 

"[british Columbia] Premier Gordon Campbell said he won't try to pressure any other provinces to take action on climate change but he hopes B.C. serves as an example. He said by giving British Columbians tax breaks on things such as fuel-efficient cars and energy-efficient appliances, British Columbians are being given real choices on battling climate change. 'It'll drive investment in the economy,' Campbell said."

 

 

The new carbon tax is not seen as a panacea. It's expected to help cut B.C.'s greenhouse-gas emissions by about 5 percent by 2020, but that's well short of the government's goal of a 33 percent reduction. The Times Colonist in Victoria, B.C., quotes University of Victoria climatologist Andrew Weaver as saying that the tax will send an important message:

 

"To me, what's important is the actual signal to the market that carbon is going to have a price. And that price is going up, not down. And that, in itself, is enough to do a paradigm shift as to how we do stuff."

 

So far, the rest of Canada is not following British Columbia's lead. Ontario's strategy, for example, includes a commitment to shut down the province's coal-fired generating plants. United Press International quotes Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty as saying:

 

"We're doing something differently here in Ontario that suits our economy and the direction that we're pursuing...."

 

 

Some federal officials in Canada are concerned that individual plans by provinces could be more costly and less efficient than a unified approach. The National Post reported:

 

"'(Canadians) don't want to pay more for cars, they don't want to pay more for other things because the governments can't get their act together and co-operate,' [Finance Minister Jim Flaherty] said."

 

That's essentially the argument the Bush administration has been using to block California and other states from regulating vehicle greenhouse gas emissions.

 

I am doing my fair share....Married a chinese wife It was 55 degrees last night in the house and we have used about 10 gal, of fuel oil so far this year.

Edited November 7, 2008 by lostinblue (see edit history)

[Feathers268]

I know, to some it may seem like a small step, and even others may doubt the sincerity. Personally, I think this is ground-breaking.

 

China: Rich nations must take climate lead

 

BEIJING, China (AP) -- China will try to persuade rich countries at a U.N.-sponsored climate change conference that opened Friday to transfer more technology to developing countries to help them battle global warming.

 

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao speaks to Danish Climate Minister Connie Hedegaard in Beijing on Friday.

 

In a speech to open the climate change conference in Beijing, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao repeated China's long-standing belief that rich countries should take the lead in addressing climate change.

 

"It took developed countries several decades to solve the problems of saving energy and cutting emissions, while China has to solve the same problem in a relatively much shorter period. So the difficulty is unprecedented," Wen said.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/...e.ap/index.html

 

So how has USA solved its energy an emissions problems ?

 

 

is not the USA the biggest energy taker and biggest polluter , yes

That is a myth and is simply not true . Yes, the US consumes the largest amount of oil, but our production of pollution has been reduced through increasingly tougher emission standards. Granted this is only anicdotal evidence, but her in Sacramento, the only time the air resembled what I saw in bejing and Shanghai was when the northern part of the state had a couple hundred wild fires or when the farmers are burning off the old rice fields.

Here is a list of the top ten poluted cities in the US,US cities.

And here is a list of the top 10 poluted cities globally, global cities.

It is believed that up to 1/4 of the particulate matter over California comes from burning coal in China that is blown over here across the Pacific.

I'm all for cleaning up the atmosphere, but not at the expense of our economy alone. The EU, China, India, Africa, Central America, and South America have to step up also.

[david_dawei]

The US is not just #1 overall, but #1 per capita (taking population into the equation)... on a per capita level, they will remain there for a very long time as #1; China ranks much lower around the world when done on a per capita basis...

 

Let's not forget consumption per population since it's people who consume... I've posted graphs on this so many times that I'm not going to do it this time... unless i find the past link.

 

 

ok.. found one:

 

http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/national_carbon_dioxide_co2_emissions_per_capita/web_national_carbon_dioxide_co2_emissions_per_capita.jpg

Edited November 8, 2008 by DavidZixuan (see edit history)

[LeeFisher3]

I know, to some it may seem like a small step, and even others may doubt the sincerity. Personally, I think this is ground-breaking.

 

China: Rich nations must take climate lead

 

BEIJING, China (AP) -- China will try to persuade rich countries at a U.N.-sponsored climate change conference that opened Friday to transfer more technology to developing countries to help them battle global warming.

 

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao speaks to Danish Climate Minister Connie Hedegaard in Beijing on Friday.

 

In a speech to open the climate change conference in Beijing, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao repeated China's long-standing belief that rich countries should take the lead in addressing climate change.

 

"It took developed countries several decades to solve the problems of saving energy and cutting emissions, while China has to solve the same problem in a relatively much shorter period. So the difficulty is unprecedented," Wen said.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/...e.ap/index.html

 

So how has USA solved its energy an emissions problems ?

 

 

is not the USA the biggest energy taker and biggest polluter , yes

In reality we haven't solved emission problems, as a country we've started but when the people see what it costs them both in money and convenience they don't really want to solve the problem now.

 

Beijing made some dramatic changes during the Olympics with the odd/even days for cars and in spite of the noticeable difference with half the cars off the roads the people didn't wish to continue.

 

The central theme seen around the world is people are happy to support someone else making a sacrifice to solve the problem of pollution, but don't make us change our own life.

 

From the article: China said developed countries should contribute at least 0.7 percent of their GDP to help fund poorer countries' fight global warming.

 

It's easy for the 186 or so countries involved in these conferences to tell the 10 rich countries they need to pay the bill for cleaning their countries without accepting any financial responsibility themselves.

 

I'm sure you wouldn't mind having 186 poorer neighbors telling you to give them 0.7 percent of your income. It really sounds good until it comes out of your pocket.

[Stepbrow]

I'm not a math guy, but rounding off the numbers. China produces about 7,500,000,000 tons per year. I got that by using the figures from Dave's graph. 5X1.5Billion people. The US produces about 6,000,000,000 tons per year. 20X300,000,000.

 

As to the issue of giving away technology, if the Chinese are asking us to give it to them, that is because they were not able to hack into the computers this is stored on, and steal it.

[IllinoisDave]

So you gots 186 guys standing around, all pointing at someone else, saying; "You go first.".

 

Does that about sum it up?

Pretty much. The white elephant in the room is that the only real way to cut down on emissions or save the planet from ourselves is to have less of ourselves. Nearly every threat to the health of the planet can be traced back to overpopulation. But people don't even want to discuss that because it would mean talking about people having less babies and that sort of thing doesn't square with what many folk's religious dogma tells them.

 

China at least recognizes that unrestrained population growth is not in it's own best interest from a purely selfish standpoint. But the rest of the world needs to realize that unrestrained growth anywhere isn't healthy for the planet as a whole either.

 

Of course this would require some level of China-style self control among all countries. Which brings us back to Don's dilemma. Who's going to go first?

[Stepbrow]

Sounds like the world needs a little leadership to solve this problem.

[LeeFisher3]

So you gots 186 guys standing around, all pointing at someone else, saying; "You go first.".

 

Does that about sum it up?

I thought it was more like 186 guys standing around doing little or nothing telling 10 others to fix it and pay for fixing it.

 

BTW did I mention they are happy to watch while the 10 pay the bill.

[rogerluli]

A very interesting and hopeful article on the greening of China...

 

http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2083

[JingJoseph]

Sooooooo let me see if I have this right.

 

Then again, tax policy can have a huge and positive impact on individual and group behavior.

 

So carbon is BAD so tax the hell out of it and there will be less.

 

Overpopulation is BAD so reduce taxes on someone who has more kids and increase handouts for unmarried mothers times the number of kids. That gets you what?

 

Pretty much broke us normal folks. .Gov control or is that the new world order? They did solve that problem in Star Trek First Contact.

Forgot where but did see on the web where some so called leaders

realy are trying to find out how based on a few parts of that movie

they did away with all your problems as they see it. Everyone is equal, money is a thing of the past. No more borders we are one big happy family fighting the borg. Good movie but realy makes you think some .govs maybe most lost site of us long ago.

[Guest ShaQuaNew]

Sooooooo let me see if I have this right.

 

Then again, tax policy can have a huge and positive impact on individual and group behavior.

 

So carbon is BAD so tax the hell out of it and there will be less.

 

Overpopulation is BAD so reduce taxes on someone who has more kids and increase handouts for unmarried mothers times the number of kids. That gets you what?

 

The pathetic reason for the downfall of the US economy?