What's new

Why New U.S.-China Climate Steps Matter: Three Things to Know

JSCh

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
13,235
Reaction score
2
Country
China
Location
China
Why New U.S.-China Climate Steps Matter: Three Things to Know
The world’s two largest polluters cap a mammoth week for climate change with a joint statement. Are they really doing anything new?

By Wendy Koch, National Geographic
PUBLISHED September 25, 2015


New U.S.-China efforts to rein in global warming, including China’s launch of a national cap-and-trade plan, hardly come as a surprise but signal leadership two months ahead of historic climate talks.

In a joint statement issued Friday at the White House, Presidents Barack Obama and Xi Jinping announced initiatives that build on the climate deal reached last year between the world’s two largest emitters of greenhouse gases.

The United States said it would, in addition to limiting emissions from its power plants, finalize standards to boost efficiency for appliances and reduce methane emissions from landfills. China pledged $3.1 billion—similar to a prior U.S. amount—to help developing countries combat climate change.

China committed to launch in 2017 a national emission trading program that would cap total emissions but allow companies to trade pollution credits. It announced a “green dispatch” system to accelerate its shift toward clean energy. As part of that shift, a Chinese company agreed this week in Seattle to build an advanced nuclear reactor with U.S.-based TerraPower, a startup backed by Microsot co-founder Bill Gates.

The prospects for a global climate agreement have brightened.
Andrew Steer

These announcements capped a dramatic week for climate change. At a summit in New York, some of the world’s largest companies—including Walmart— set targets for getting all their power from renewable energy. Also, Pope Francis, after lauding Obama’s climate efforts, told a gridlocked Congress that the U.S. has an obligation to lead: “Now is the time for courageous actions and strategies.”

What does all of this mean? While some initiatives were expected, analysts say they create momentum for a sweeping climate accord later this year at the United Nations summit in Paris, slated to begin November 30.

“The prospects for a global climate agreement have brightened,” says Andrew Steer, president of the World Resources Institute, a research group. Here are key takeaways from this week’s announcements:

They underscore existing efforts. The U.S. and China are already moving to curb carbon emissions. The Obama administration had previously announced almost all the steps cited in the joint statement, notably its Clean Power Plan to cut emissions from power plants 32 percent—from 2005 levels—by 2030.

China’s pledge to finance climate projects is a “watershed moment,” Steer says, adding it should reassure developing countries that money will be available from “a broader pool of contributors.”

Its “green dispatch” system could speed adoption of zero-emitting power sources such as nuclear, wind, and solar. China still depends heavily on coal for electricity, although its production and consumption of coal fell last year for the first time in at least a decade, according to U.S. government data.

“The commitment is very real,” says Tom Werner, CEO of California-based SunPower, who spoke shortly before attending a White House luncheon for Xi. His company is building solar farms in China to power Apple’s operations there. He says China’s solar appetite is huge, and it could add three times as much solar capacity this year as the U.S.

At the same time, Werner says there’s an ambiguity in tracking China’s progress because of its continued coal use. He’s seen lines of coal trucks pass by his solar farms, which he plans to finish within six months.

“They’re very serious. In some ways, they’re more serious than we are,” says John Gilleland, chief technology officer of Washington-based TerraPower, noting China’s rapid push for new infrastructure. He says China believes in climate change and wants to reduce the smog that’s choking its cities.

“They’re building nuclear plants like crazy,” says Gilleland, who attended the signing of the agreement Tuesday between his company and the China National Nuclear Corporation. He expects the new commercial “traveling wave” reactors, which burn fuel made from depleted uranium, will be built within 10 years.

China’s embracing a global carbon pricing trend. China had previously indicated it would roll out a national cap-and-trade system, but it hadn’t given details. On Friday, it said the system would cover its electricity, steel, cement, and other industries.

It’s already been experimenting with carbon pricing. Since 2013, China launched seven regional pilots, which now comprise the world’s second-largest cap-and-trade system—after the European Union’s. Those pilots raise questions.

“It’s not transparent how the caps are set or adjusted” and very few trades have occurred so far, says Clayton Munnings, who’s studied China’s carbon trading as a research associate for Resources for the Future, a think tank. He says it’s too early to tell what impact they’ll have, especially since China is taking other steps to reduce air pollution.

Worldwide, the number of carbon pricing schemes has nearly doubled since 2012 and they now cover 23 cities and 40 countries, according to a September report by the World Bank. They include 17 cap-and-trade programs, including one begun this year in South Korea, as well as taxes on carbon emissions, which South Africa plans to impose next year.

U.S. is also pushing cap-and-trade. The new joint climate statement doesn’t say it, but Obama’s power plant rule—finalized in August—offers a backdoor approach for carbon trading. Five years ago, Obama failed to get a controversial cap-and-trade bill passed in Congress. Now, he's using his executive authority, sure to be challenged in court, to promote cap-and-trade.

Many economists back carbon pricing as a cost-effective way to curb emissions. Here’s why: Polluters get tradeable allowances to emit a certain amount. If they can make cuts cheaply, they can sell unneeded permits (for a profit) to those that would find cuts costlier.

Under the Clean Power Plan, the cornerstone of Obama's climate agenda, states can opt to launch a market or join the two existing ones in California and the Northeast. “States can enter into markets the EPA can manage and keep track of,” Gina McCarthy, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, said at a Washington, D.C. forum.

In fact, trading becomes the default federal option for states that don’t submit plans for cutting emissions. The rule even says: “It is reasonable to anticipate that a virtually nationwide emissions trading market for compliance will emerge.”

Why New U.S.-China Climate Steps Matter: Three Things to Know
 
.
it is matter because it will put huge pressure on other emerging economy such as India. Have anyone notice that the western media have soften their tongue on chinese pollution issue, they start to target India.

In another words, China and U.S. are the rule setter , others are just game player. Just like only the UN P5 members are legit nuclear states, others who own nukes are illegal and are subject to sanctions.
China and US are also going to set the rules on cyber and space, especially the near space.
 
.
it is matter because it will put huge pressure on other emerging economy such as India. Have anyone notice that the western media have soften their tongue on chinese pollution issue, they start to target India.

In another words, China and U.S. are the rule setter , others are just game player. Just like only the UN P5 members are legit nuclear states, others who own nukes are illegal and are subject to sanctions.
China and US are also going to set the rules on cyber and space, especially the near space.
True.
My city is much cleaner than before, it has been transforming from a major industrial hub(one of the largest steel company in the world) to innovation and high-tech hub, so are a lot of old-style industrial cities in Central China and Western China like Xi'an, Zhengzhou, Chongqing, etc.

We are witnessing a greener China with more focus on technological innovation and expanding service sector.
 
. .
The days of quick industrial turnaround are OVER!! This is why India lost the decade to industrialize and they will feel the pressure of the new climate deal.
Climate deal and the ongoing industrial revolution.
People think any country can replicate China's growing speed.
Hey, it's not 1980-1990s!
 
.
Climate deal and the ongoing industrial revolution.
People think any country can replicate China's growing speed.
Hey, it's not 1980-1990s!
The world doesn't have enough resource to sustain USA, China, and India. This is why we are very quick to team up with the USA to ensure India will remain agrarian society. There will never be another China and we make sure of that.
 
.
The world doesn't have enough resource to sustain USA, China, and India. This is why we are very quick to team up with the USA to ensure India will remain agrarian society. There will never be another China and we make sure of that.
It's an illusion should some of the Indians feel like they can replicate and outperform China.
 
.
In another words, China and U.S. are the rule setter , others are just game player. Just like only the UN P5 members are legit nuclear states, others who own nukes are illegal and are subject to sanctions.

An interesting conjecture, so you think that this so called Sino-American Bilateralism will be the 'new normal' in regards to geopolitical structural schema implementation? Can you tell me how this new paradigm might affect the organization and the implementation of NATO and other pertinent security processes?

Thanks.

“It’s not transparent how the caps are set or adjusted” and very few trades have occurred so far, says Clayton Munnings, who’s studied China’s carbon trading as a research associate for Resources for the Future, a think tank. He says it’s too early to tell what impact they’ll have, especially since China is taking other steps to reduce air pollution.

Pertinent point, I suppose we can expect a gradual shift towards cleaner energy; expect the rise of hydrogen fuel cells, electric , nuclear, and i suppose its in context to the coal plants being closed in China. This is fine and all, however, the issue will be enforcing this schema not just in East Asia, but in South Asia and the rest of the developing world such as the Middle East and most of Africa.
 
.
An interesting conjecture, so you think that this so called Sino-American Bilateralism will be the 'new normal' in regards to geopolitical structural schema implementation? Can you tell me how this new paradigm might affect the organization and the implementation of NATO and other pertinent security processes?

Thanks.



Pertinent point, I suppose we can expect a gradual shift towards cleaner energy; expect the rise of hydrogen fuel cells, electric , nuclear, and i suppose its in context to the coal plants being closed in China. This is fine and all, however, the issue will be enforcing this schema not just in East Asia, but in South Asia and the rest of the developing world such as the Middle East and most of Africa.
It won't.
Clean energy is expensive, u cannot enforce poor countries to do that.
 
. . .
Clean energy is expensive, u cannot enforce poor countries to do that.


Yes, i suppose its part of the methodology of industrialization. Eventually, however, there comes a point that industrializing nations will opt for cleaner energy due to the effects on the environment. I think China's current war on pollution is a perfect example of requiring balance between industrialization and environmental protectionism. I think India and the rest of the developing world is not immune to that ---- inevitability. Don't you agree?
 
.
An interesting conjecture, so you think that this so called Sino-American Bilateralism will be the 'new normal' in regards to geopolitical structural schema implementation? Can you tell me how this new paradigm might affect the organization and the implementation of NATO and other pertinent security processes?

Thanks.
I think bilateral treaties like this make Sino-US interest more allied, but it could also distance china from other emerging nations that used to be on the same side with china on many issues. for example, I would assume this agreement allows china to have more access to clean energy technologies such as nuclear and advanced manufactutering technologies from Western countries especially from US. those carbon intensive countries are either going to follow the standard or become less competitive, meaning industrialisation in countries like India ,Indonesia and Mexico won't be as easy as China's.

In terms of security and military domain, i think cyber and near space are the next two areas that China and US will likely to reach an agreement, and even make it an international law. For example, currently there is no clear definition of a country's territorial airspace, the current international law only defines the horizontal boundary of the sovereign airspace, but no agreement on the vertical extent of sovereign airspace, there is no law to regulate activities between 40km - 160km above the earth where HGV and low obit satellite are likely to be, so if an US spyplane entered our air space fly at the altitude of 30km and we shoot it down, US won't have any issue, but if we shoot down an US low obit spy satellite that taking picture above Beijing at 150km altitude , it would escalate very quickly, we can blind it for a period of time with laser( we did that many times),but shoot it down would be too risky, even though it's not in outer space where there is an international law . China has demonstrated its capabilities in this area by all kinds of HGV and ASAT tests, i think what we want is to set the rules that fever us, china and US are likely going to improve and perfect the definition of sovereign airspace, china prefer no spy satellite and define sovereign airspace as below 160km, but US prefer keep some level of ambiguity because US military relays heavily on spy satellite. However, even if we can't reach an agreement on the definition of sovereign airspace, china US plus Russia maybe will definitely form an exclusive club of near space activities to stop other countries from developing these capabilities.
 
Last edited:
.
i don't agree that going to green energy will slow down developing countries' economic growth or industrialization. for china's own case cleaner air and climate protection are the objectives to fight for, this is the case for other developing economies as well. Clean energy is not necessarily more expensive than coal electricity. In China's case, prices for nuclear and coal electricity are at RMB yuan 0.46 and 0.50 per KWh (no peak time), respectively. China is rapidly going to clean energy for many reasons, first it is good for air quality and global climate, second china is a big player in R&D and production on all kinds of clean energy, so going to clean energy means numerous big business opportunities.
 
.
That's why developing countries will be more and more polluted during industrialisation.

The case of Japan "Minamata disease" back in the old days

i don't agree that going to green energy will slow down developing countries' economic growth or industrialization. for china's own case cleaner air and climate protection are the objectives to fight for, this is the case for other developing economies as well. Clean energy is not necessarily more expensive than coal electricity. In China's case, prices for nuclear and coal electricity are at RMB yuan 0.46 and 0.50 per KWh (no peak time), respectively. China is rapidly going to clean energy for many reasons, first it is good for air quality and global climate, second china is a big player in R&D and production on all kinds of clean energy, so going to clean energy means numerous big business opportunities.

Agree that Green energy will not slow down developing countries economic growth but green energy are depend a lot on the country climate for the sustainable supply, also it is difficult to generate huge amount of those energy for supply at the same time as those produced by coal power plant with current technology. Also another matter is that it is require large amount of land to assemble and operate (function), those land is basically have no value after and those land maybe can use for another economic activity to boost economic growth, much better opportunity cost
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom