Unfortunately, in the wrong direction.
I don’t buy the argument that currency manipulation is the real culprit, but it’s always good to have a scary villain.
This is a very informative article. It’s also representative of why I read ClimateProgress which posted a long excerpt a couple of days ago: http://goo.gl/CCday
A NYTs article reports that China may be revise its energy policy within the next couple of weeks: http://goo.gl/KUVFQ. I have an RSS feed on global warming articles from the Times, who I’ve found to be the best American mainstream media source for global warming articles with the exception of the San Jose Mercury News when it comes to covering the emerging green tech industry.
Being an advocate for maximum growth I think this article is overly critical towards China when it fails to provide sufficient nuance to frame the following finding:
Almost singlehandedly, China negated global emissions reductions last year. Data shows that global CO2 emissions from energy use stabilized during 2008 and 2009 (in fact, it declined by 97 million tons, or 0.3%), but the six top emitters (US, Russia, Japan, Germany, Canada and UK) and the rest of the world together reduced their CO2 emissions by 1.15 billion tons. China’s 906 million tons, combined with increases from India, Iran and South Korea, totaled a 1.06 billion ton increase in emissions. On net, the world made no gains (Exhibit-2).
This is certainly worthy information, but a parsing of how much was due to China’s growth outstripping other countries vs. other countries efforts to conserve or implement greener energy sources is left begging. From my perspective our best shot at getting agreement requires more focus on innovation – from transformation to greener energy sources to more efficient use of energy; and not so much lambasting countries for their success in growing their economies. As I’ve noted prior, China’s growth requires it face up to global responsibilities its not used to carrying. But it didn’t create this problem, Germany, the U.K., Japan, and especially the U.S. did. Therefore we have an obligation to engage with them on mitigation where we effectively deny the existence of this problem.
From my perspective our best shot at getting agreement requires more focus on innovation – from transformation to greener energy sources to more efficient use of energy; and not so much lambasting countries for their success in growing their economies.
I agree, as the costs of alternative energy fall, the political costs of imposing carbon taxes will fall too.
Comments are closed.
Join 34 other followers
subscribe to the Bawdy House