China, not Obama, wrecked Copenhagen deal

Copenhagen was a disaster. That much is agreed. But the truth about what actually happened is in danger of being lost amid the spin and inevitable mutual recriminations. The truth is this: China wrecked the talks, intentionally humiliated Barack Obama, and insisted on an awful "deal" so western leaders would walk away carrying the blame. How do I know this? Because I was in the room and saw it happen.

...

Copenhagen was much worse than just another bad deal, because it illustrated a profound shift in global geopolitics. This is fast becoming China's century, yet its leadership has displayed that multilateral environmental governance is not only not a priority, but is viewed as a hindrance to the new superpower's freedom of action.

Click to expand...

w1z4rd said:

Yeah, most people who followed the talks know this. There was a lot of shuffling with China and India leading the way to scuttle the talks so they could maintain their emissions.

Click to expand...

Palimino said:

I am not criticising (I do not know enough) but you are implying that in spite of the scale of the problem (which could lead to extinction), China and India played petty politics. With all their ‘climate experts’ giving advice they nevertheless considered maintaining their emissions a higher priority. Seems irresponsible. The Chinese are supposed to be clever.

Click to expand...

Exports to Europe and US behind 15% of emissions

The full extent of the west's responsibility for Chinese emissions of greenhouse gases has been revealed by a new study. The report shows that half of the recent rise in China's carbon dioxide pollution is caused by the manufacturing of goods for other countries - particularly developed nations such as the UK.
Last year, China officially overtook the US as the world's biggest CO2 emitter. But the new research shows that about a third of all Chinese carbon emissions are the result of producing goods for export.

Click to expand...

The Emissions Thing

It's generally been the United States' position that China should commit to reducing its emissions as prerequisite to domestic action.
What we (as a nation) fail to realize, however, is that per capita (the amount of emissions per person), emissions in China are far less than in the U.S. And if that surprises you, wait 'til you see these other comparisons...

Both China and the U.S. have set emissions goals for 2020:

The U.S. has proposed a 17% cut in emissions from 2005 levels

China has proposed a 40% to 45% reduction in carbon intensity (per person) from 2005 levels
The World Resources Institute has said those two efforts would have about the same outcome.

But here's the kicker: China's goal is official policy. Ours is simply a goal announced by the White House, though the EPA now has the authority to act independently.

So who's more committed?

The Energy Thing

Last year, China got 9% of its energy from renewable resources. It has committed to raise that number to 15% by 2020. But recent reports show that if the current expansion rate continues, solar power alone could reach five or ten times the 15% target.

The most recent U.S. data comes from 2007, when we received 7% of our energy from renewable resources. A 15% by 2020 target has been passed by the House, but the Senate has yet to act. If passed, state governors could reduce the target to 12% if they increase efficiency targets.

Who's more committed? Who's making more progress?

The Efficiency Thing

Three years ago, China pledged to improve energy efficiency 20% by 2010. They are on target to reach that goal and to create a more stringent goal for 2020.

The U.S. — while committing a few billion for efficiency projects in the stimulus — has set no firm targets. The Waxman-Markey bill that has passed the House mandates a paltry 5% by 2020.

Who's more committed?

Click to expand...

China's market for wind equipment is on track to overtake the U.S. this year as the world's largest, spurred by a government campaign to promote renewable energy to clean up its battered environment and curb surging demand for foreign oil and gas.

"In an incredibly short space of time China has taken the lead in the race to develop and commercialize a range of low-carbon technologies," said the Climate Group, a London-based environmental organization, in a report in August.

Click to expand...

Shanghai World Expo to be held next year will be another stage showcasing the city's low carbon ideas and products, such as more than 1000 new energy vehicles, an integrated photovoltaic and a river water source heat pump. It is estimated that the carbon emission during the Expo will be reduced by up to 30 percent if all the facilities are put into use.

Click to expand...

Experts have calculated that if all of China's office buildings were retrofitted to this level of efficiency, enough energy would be saved to render the famous Three Gorges Dam unnecessary. In that spirit, the Chinese government has already used Agenda21 as a model for retrofitting government buildings.

Click to expand...

China holds the maximum share with 1,895 CDM projects, or 39.6% of those in the pipeline, followed by India with 1,207, or 25.2% in the pipeline. Brazil, with 347 projects, accounts for 7.3%. The fourth major contender is Mexico with 162 projects and a 3.4% share.

The total emission reduction potential of the 4,782 projects is 661 million CER credits and this is expected to go up to 2,820 million CER credits by 2012. The 1,895 Chinese projects currently have an emission reduction potential of 371 million CER credits that will increase to 1,544 million credits by 2012, accounting for 54.8% of the global share.

Click to expand...

Nanfeishen said:

Ah, China , the wests new ogre.
Yes, toss out your nikes, levi's and all your electronics, they are horror of horror's probabily all made in China.
Why is that? ...Because many companies have now shifted from U.S. and European bases production lines, to making those very things in China.
How has that affected China's emissions, one must ask, well according to one report, that shift has accounted for more than half of China's emmisions rise, equating to about 15% of China's total emmisions


http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/feb/23/china-co2-emissions-climate

Another very interesting article worth reading WRT the whole issue:

http://www.greenchipstocks.com/articles/clean-energy-in-china-and-the-us/607

And then there is the emerging clean energy market of technology and building, once again being driven by none other than China:


http://www.pddnet.com/news-chinese-wind-power-targets-global-markets-120709/

The upcoming Shanghai World Expo

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90776/90882/6843131.html

Building project that may become government standard throughout China:

http://china.nrdc.org/chinas-first-green-office-building

Some nice info on LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) building projects being commisioned WRT to China
http://greendragonfilm.com/certification.html

Another very interesting article WRT clean development mechanism (CDM) Projects and Carbon credit share trading:

http://www.financialexpress.com/news/china-india-and-brazil-ahead-in-carbon-credits/551570/#
So according, in 2 years time China will control the global CER trade.

Unlike most Western countries where powerful lobbyists representing major industry have too much say in government policy WRT to emmisions cuts, China has a government that implements policy and you either tow the line or are dealt with.
Personally , WRT to going greener, i would prefer strong governmental policy stipulating building standards and industry standards, and ensuring that all building requirements and industrial technologies meet certain green objectives to limp wristed lobbying for certain concessions that take years to implement and enforce.

Click to expand...