What Car Sales Tell Us About Asia's Rise

Dark Clouds may hover over India and China's future growth stories. But the past decade has been about the rise of Asia. Car sales since 2005 bear that out. Question is, can Asia get its golden phase back?

An image from the Mail India Today, March 5th, 2014

Access to Data Still Barred (China Dialogue)

China Dialogue, May 13th, 2011
Access to Environmental Data Still Barred.

*******************

Three years after China passed green transparency legislation, getting hold of actual data remains a tough task.

Three years have passed since China introduced legislation confirming the public’s right to access environmental information. But both experts and members of the public who have requested the disclosure of pollution data – from both government and business – have found that the vague terms in which the regulations are couched are impeding their implementation.

“Although the regulations list 19 types of information that should be disclosed and only one short clause on exemptions, that one short clause has become a catch-all,” explained Wang Canfa, director of the Center for Legal Assistance to Victims of Pollution, speaking at a seminar on April 27 to mark the law’s three year anniversary. In many other countries, he said, exceptions are specifically listed and everything else must be disclosed, a system he believes China should also adopt.

Regulations on the disclosure of government information and a trial method for the disclosure of environmental information were officially implemented three years ago. The April seminar, organised by Chinese NGO Friends of Nature, brought together experts and environmental activists to examine how those regulations are being put into practice.

The eighth article of the regulations on disclosure of government information rules that any data that threatens national security, public security, economic security or social stability must not be disclosed. According to Wang, those exceptions are commonly used by officials to block disclosure and this one clause alone has greatly reduced the level of information released to the public.

In addition, said Wang, the boundary between state secrets and commercial secrets is fuzzy. He said that many firms go so far as to class the details of their pollution-treatment equipment and release of pollutants as commercial secrets – claiming that those requesting this information could use it to identify the raw materials and technologies being used.

Yong Rong, government and public affairs officer at Greenpeace, said that in 2009 his organisation asked Zhuzhou Environmental Protection Bureau to release the pollution record of two companies. Two months later, a reply came: as listed companies, both firms were sensitive to the release of information. In addition, there was no electronic version of the 200 items of information requested, and therefore no way to publish the data online.

Chen Liwen of Green Beagle, another Chinese environmental NGO, requested information on a garbage-incineration facility in Jiangsu province, eastern China, from the local authority – Hai’an county – and the Nantong Environmental Protection Bureau. Despite going in person to make her request, the data Chen received was useless. Her full request was refused due to commercial confidentiality and the fact that her organisation had no connection to the facility.

“When compared with government, businesses are doing pitifully on environmental disclosure,” said Hu Jing of the China University of Political Science and Law (CUPL). “Even disclosure by large firms is extremely limited.”

CUPL’s Environment and Resources Law Institute and UK-based campaign group Article 19 carried out an investigation into data-disclosure levels, making a series of requests to governments and businesses. Of five large companies approached in and around Beijing – Shougang Steel, Beijing Eastern Chemicals, China Huaneng, China National Petroleum Corporation and Beijing Hyundai – disclosed information on the release of pollutants or on voluntary agreements with environmental authorities to improve their environmental performance. In some cases, no reason was provided for refusing the request.

In 2008, pollution from the Gaoantun incinerator in Beijing led locals to take to the streets in protest, forcing the government to publicly apologise and promise to invest a further 90 million yuan (US$13.9 million) in improving the facility. Local resident Zhao Lei asked the government for information on how that money had been spent – and much later received a reply admitting there was a pollution problem, promising to improve the situation and thanking her for her concern, but saying nothing about the 90 million yuan.

In 2009, Beijing resident Yang Zi asked the Beijing Environmental Protection Bureau for data from tests at a medical-waste incineration site, and the explanation for granting the site its temporary license – only to be told that the government was supervising the site but did not have any information.

During CUPL and Article 19’s investigation, reasons offered by environmental authorities for refusing data requests included the information being “inconvenient to provide” and “not suitable for disclosure, as it could cause media speculation”.

Wang Canfa believes that the people who actually handle the data requests in the environmental protection bureaus have to consult their superiors in each case – and this is why the requests are often blocked.

Xia Jun, a lawyer at the Beijing Zhongzi Legal Practice, described the last three years as “one step forward, two steps back”. Wang explained that, in 2010, the State Council ruled that requests could be refused if the information was irrelevant to the applicant’s work, life, research or other particular needs, and that each request could only ask for one piece of information, greatly limiting the scope of information the public can demand.

According to CUPL and Article 19’s report, of 11 types of information tested, the easiest to obtain was general information such as planning for local environmental protection and environmental quality. Types of dangerous waste and how it was handled, amounts of waste released and lists of companies breaching local limits were hardest to come by.

Ma Jun, director of the Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs, has argued that a lack of motivation and poor enforcement are the primary reasons environmental problems remain unresolved. Public participation is needed to make up for those failings – but obtaining environmental information is a precondition for that public participation. In 2009, Yang Chaofei, head of the department of policies, laws and regulations at the Ministry of Environmental Protection, said that “local environmental protection bureaus should support pollution lawsuits brought by the public and provide them with pollution-monitoring data.”

China’s disclosure failings are not solely caused by poor legislation, said Wang Canfa. The deeper problem is that institutional reform and social development are not yet sufficiently advanced. But there is hope: he used the example of Shanghai resident Xu Taisheng to encourage people to be more determined in pursuing information. Xu spent three years applying for the environmental impact assessment for a Baogang Steel project to be made public, receiving 13 judgements in the process. He applied, reapplied, sued, appealed, appealed again, appealed again, petitioned and then finally appealed to the Supreme People’s Court. In the end, he got the information he wanted – and financial compensation.

According to the Ministry of Environmental Protection’s working report, in 2010, 226 applications for disclosure of information were received – an increase of more than 200% on the previous year.

Meng Si is managing editor in chinadialogue’s Beijing office.

Air Quality Awareness Week in China

China.Org, May 4th, 2011
Air Quality Awareness Week.

Air Quality Awareness Week, a cooperative effort among Environmental Protection Agency, state environmental agencies and the National Weather Service of the United States to remind the public to protect their health by paying attention to local air quality.

With the onset of warmer weather, the EPA urges citizens to be aware of the increased risk of ground-level ozone air pollution and fine particle air pollution (when combined, often referred to as smog), and take health precautions when poor air quality is predicted.

Air quality is defined as a measure of the condition of air relative to the requirements of one or more biotic species and or to any human need or purpose.

Air quality indices (AQI) are numbers used by government agencies to characterize the quality of the air at a given location. As the AQI increases, an increasingly large percentage of the population is likely to experience increasingly severe adverse health effects.

To compute the AQI requires an air pollutant concentration from a monitor or model. The function used to convert from air pollutant concentration to AQI varies by pollutant, and is different in different countries.

Air quality index values are divided into ranges, and each range is assigned a descriptor and a color code. Standardized public health advisories are associated with each AQI range. An agency might also encourage members of the public to take public transportation or work from home when AQI levels are high.

Air quality forecasts are issued daily by the state air agencies. Current air quality conditions and next day forecasts are available each day at the state's web site. People can also sign up to receive air quality alerts. The alert system automatically notifies participants by e-mail or text message when poor air quality is predicted in their area.

The higher the air quality index and the higher the related risk. Good or low corresponds to acceptable or low risk situations. High values present an unhealthy high risk for respiratory ailments.

Ozone, particulates, NOx, and SO2 are common sources of poor air quality. To protect one's health, citizens should limit their strenuous outdoor activity on air quality alert days, and help take steps to reduce emissions when air quality is unhealthy.

Warm summer temperatures aid in the formation of ground-level ozone and fine particle pollution. In 2008, EPA strengthened the ozone air quality health standard. The new ozone standard is set at 0.075 parts per million on an 8-hour average basis. Air quality alerts (for example) are issued when ozone concentrations exceed, or are predicted to exceed, this level.

Poor air quality affects everyone, but some people are particularly sensitive to air pollutants, including children and adults who are active outdoors, and people with respiratory diseases, such as asthma. When air quality is predicted to be unhealthy, EPA and the states will announce an air quality alerts for the affected areas.

It is recommended that people in these areas limit strenuous outdoor activity, and reduce certain usages as follows:

-Use public transportation or walk whenever possible;

-Combine errands and car-pool to reduce driving time and mileage;

-Use less electricity by turning air conditioning to a higher temperature setting, and turning off lights, TVs and computers when they are not being used;

-Avoid using small gasoline-powered engines, such as lawn mowers, chain saws and leaf blowers on unhealthy air days.

Cars, motorcycles, trucks, and buses are a primary source of the pollutants that make smog. Fossil-fuel burning at electric-generating stations, particularly on hot days, also generates significant smog-forming pollution. Other industries, as well as smaller sources, such as gasoline stations and print shops, also contribute to smog. In addition, household products like paints and cleaners, as well as gasoline-powered lawn and garden equipment, also contribute to smog formation.

The Impact of China's Vehicle Emissions on Regional Air Quality in 2000 and 2020: A Scenario Analysis

From the Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussion Series - Saikawa et al., 2011

Abstract

The number of vehicles in China has been increasing rapidly. We evaluate the impact of current and possible future vehicle emissions from China on Asian air quality. We modify the Regional Emission Inventory in Asia (REAS) for China's road transport sector in 2000 using updated Chinese data for vehicle numbers, annual mileage and emission factors. We develop two scenarios for 2020: a scenario where emission factors remain the same as they were before any regulation was implemented (business-as-usual, BAU), and a scenario where Euro 3 vehicle emission standards are applied to all vehicles (except motorcycles and rural vehicles). The Euro 3 scenario is an approximation of what may be the case in 2020 as, starting in 2008, all new gasoline and diesel vehicles in China (except motorcycles) were required to meet the Euro 3 emission standards. Using the Weather Research and Forecasting model coupled with Chemistry (WRF/Chem), we examine the regional air quality response to China's vehicle emissions in 2000 and in 2020 for the BAU and Euro 3 scenarios. We evaluate the 2000 model results with observations in Japan, China, Korea, and Russia. Under BAU in 2020, emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NO_x), non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs), black carbon (BC) and organic carbon (OC) from China's vehicles more than double compared to the 2000 baseline. If all vehicles meet the Euro 3 regulations in 2020, however, these emissions are reduced by more than 50% relative to BAU. The implementation of stringent vehicle emission standards leads to a large, simultaneous reduction of the surface ozone (O₃) mixing ratios and particulate matter (PM_2.5) concentrations. In the Euro 3 scenario, surface O₃ is reduced by more than 10 ppbv and surface PM_2.5 is reduced by more than 10 μg m⁻³ relative to BAU in Northeast China in all seasons. In spring, surface O₃ mixing ratios and PM_2.5 concentrations in neighboring countries are also reduced by more than 3 ppbv and 1 μg m⁻³, respectively. We find that effective regulation of China's road transport sector will be of significant benefit for air quality both within China and across East Asia as well.

Transition to Electric Cars in China (NY Times)

From NY Times, April 20th, 2011

A STUDY prepared for the World Bank Transport Office in Beijing released today makes clear the urgency of China’s transition to electric cars. According to “The China New Vehicles Program: Challenges and Opportunities,” prepared by PRTM, a management consulting firm, China’s soaring consumption of imported oil could stifle the country’s economy, while emissions from petroleum-powered vehicles could choke its cities with air pollution.

Seventy percent of Beijing’s carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions come from transportation sources. China’s oil consumption is expected to rise to 11.6 million barrels per day by 2020, from 7.6 million in 2007. Half its oil currently is imported.

“This was recognizance,” said Shomik Mehndiratta, lead transport specialist at the World Bank. “Usually, we focus our urban transport work on walking, cycling, public transportation and land development to minimize auto travel, and we leave technology completely out of it. But all the analysis suggests that 50 percent of global carbon reductions in transportation will come from technology.”

Any financial support from the World Bank would be dwarfed by the Chinese government’s commitment to spend $15 billion on building and selling electric cars in the next five years.

“The money is not the key here,” said Oliver Hazimeh, head of the global e-mobility practice and a partner at PRTM. “The bigger notion of this report is helping China figuring out what else needs to be addressed in the overall ecosystem to make E.V.’s work. It is a technical, business-modeling, policy-setting support role more than a financial one.”

As dire as the need to go electric is for China, the challenges in making the transition to electric vehicles are even more monumental, according to the PRTM study, and similar to the situation in the United States. The first several hundred plug-in cars started rolling on to American roadways earlier this year, but availability of vehicles is just the beginning.

The long list of challenges in China (and the United States) includes uncertainty about how much car charging infrastructure is needed; lack of standards for how and where vehicles will be charged; and the need for industries that have traditionally not worked together — utilities and auto companies, for example — to forge partnerships.

Then there’s the elephant in the room: how to gain consumer acceptance for battery-powered cars when their driving range is shorter than gas or diesel vehicles but their costs are significantly higher. Helping China to reach massive scale of electric car production is expected to bring down those costs in the next five to 10 years.

According to Mr. Hazimeh, in both China and the United States different regions and constituents are each developing their own standards for vehicle and battery production, charging infrastructure and related business models.

“In China, you can’t just go in as we do in the U.S., and say here’s the money for parts solutions without looking at connecting the elements,” he said.

The study recommends roughly $50 million in loans for pilot projects, from building charging infrastructure and related information networks to evaluating the commercial feasibility of re-using E.V. batteries in secondary markets.

The consequences extend beyond national borders, as China is now the world’s largest auto market and is expected to become the world’s largest producer of electric car batteries and drive systems. The Chinese automotive market is expected to grow to 30 million vehicles per year by 2030, from 12.9 million vehicles in 2009.

“The next stage is to take the lessons learned, and put it into a more coordinated aligned roadmap,” Mr. Hazimeh said. “Otherwise, you face a fragmentation of solutions.”

Can Electric Cars Gain Acceptance in China?

From Global Times, China.

It's been over 10 months since the central government began offering subsidies to automakers in five cities, including Shanghai, in a bid to lower the retail price of electric cars.

However, Shanghai only recently saw the first electric car purchases since the subsidies came into effect – and these purchases were by eight car manufacturer employees who knew each other.

See the video below on a bold plan to mass produce electric vehicles

So why has takeup been so low, particularly as pressure from soaring diesel and gasoline prices mean car owners are now spending an average 370 yuan ($56.60) for every 200 kilometers they drive?

In comparison, an electric car can run nearly 200 kilometers on just one charge, which only costs around 10 yuan ($1.53). Factor in the effect of subsidies, which can make the retail cost of electric cars competitive, and you'd be forgiven for expecting drivers to be flocking to electric.

However, the potential savings are not enough to allay consumer fears, most of which are related to the lack of infrastructure and support for electric vehicles and the current limitations of electric car technology.

The maximum range of electric cars is around 200 kilometers before they need recharging. But recharge points are scarce, making electric cars only suitable for traveling short distances in areas that have access to recharge points, and impractical for longer journeys between cities.

Even in Shanghai, the home of Shanghai International Automobile City – a comprehensive auto production base in the city's Jiading district – provision of battery recharging services is not well developed. There are plans for Jiading district to have 130 by the end of this year, while there are no recharge points anywhere else in Shanghai.

What's more, batteries have a lifespan of less than 100,000 kilometers, meaning electric car owners face the additional cost of frequently swapping batteries – around 30,000 yuan ($4,587) each.

A related issue is after-sales service. With electric cars a rarity, the cost of parts is high. Knowledge among mechanics about how to carry out repairs is nowhere near as widespread as for conventional cars. With after-sales services still a source of difficulty in the conventional car market in China, no wonder consumers are wary about the situation with regards to electric cars.

Taking a wider view, while electric cars themselves do not emit pollutants, the methods used to generate the electricity to recharge their batteries do. China's electricity generation is primarily through coal-powered plants, which account for over 70 percent of overall output. If electric cars were to become more popular, this would further drive up demand for electricity, and emissions of pollutants such as carbon monoxide and sulfur dioxide. Air quality in major cities may well be improved, but only at the expense of coal-producing and electricity-generating areas.

So now is too early to be focusing on the production or sale of electric cars. Instead, we should first lay down sound supporting infrastructure and policies, and solve the problems and limitations inherent in the technology, such as electricity generation and battery recharging.

Bus Rapid Transit and Bike Share Programs in Guanzhou, China

Guangzhou is one of the fastest growing cities in the world. The economic hub of China's southern coast, it has undergone three decades of rapid modernization, and until recently the city's streets were on a trajectory to get completely overrun by traffic congestion and pollution. But Guangzhou has started to change course. Last year the city made major strides to cut carbon emissions and reclaim space for people, opening new bus rapid transit and public bike-sharing systems.

The Guangzhou BRT system opened in February 2010. It now carries 800,000 passengers a day, seamlessly connecting riders to both the metro system and the city's new bike-share network. For these innovations, Guangzhou won the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy's 2011 Sustainable Transport Award. Watch this Streetfilm and see how one of the world's most dynamic cities is "winning the future" on its streets.

Urban Sprawl in China - in Picture

CNBC on "The Rise of China's 2nd and 3rd Tier Cities" on February 4th, 2011.

Image published in the Guardian on February 3rd, "China: The year in environment - in pictures" caught my eye..

Already number one for carbon emissions, China earned another environmentally dubious accolade in July when it was declared the world’s biggest power consumer. Part of the reason is the spectacular urbanisation seen in this night-time satellite image of the country’s north-east, where the illuminated cities of Beijing (population 12 million) and Tianjin (7 million) form giant man-made stars. China's use of coal, oil, wind and other sources of power more than doubled in the past decade, according to the International Energy Agency. In 2009, it reached the equivalent of 2.26bn tonnes of oil, creeping past the US, which had been the world's biggest energy user since records

Coal trucks snarl up National Highway 207 in north China's Hebei province at the height of what became known as the “world’s worst traffic jam”. Lasting 11 days and stretching more than 60 miles, the congestion forced drivers to sleep in their cabs for several nights as they made progress at the rate of half a mile a day. The primary cause was road works on an exceptionally busy stretch of road between China’s coal heartland of Inner Mongolia and the ports and power plants of Shandong and Tianjin. Rising demand for energy has increased the number of trucks on this transport bottleneck. Congestion and traffic pollution are growing problems on China’s roads as car ownership surges. Beijing is among the worst affected cities. The number of vehicles in the city has increased from 1m to 4m in the past 12 years

Air Pollution in Urumqi, China

Urumqi, one of China's most polluted cities, plans to move dozens of factories from urban areas and tear down thousands of coal-burning boilers this year to clean its skies of their habitual winter smoke.

Link to the article..
The government of the Northwest China city, capital of Xinjiang Uygur autonomous region, aims to cut 5,000 tons of sulfur dioxide emissions this year, more than double the estimated 2,000 tons of emissions cut in 2010, said a spokesman for the municipal environment department Monday. Urumqi's severe air pollution is mainly caused by industrial activities and winter heating supply. The city emitted 128,000 tons of sulfur dioxide and 61,000 tons of soot in 2009. Residents complain that air pollution in Urumqi has grown so serious that the city seems to be constantly shrouded in thick black smoke during the winter.

Urumqi Mayor Jerla Isamudinhe said at the annual meeting of the city's legislature, which ended over the weekend, that the government would push to change the city's winter heating sources. About 5,000 coal-burning small boilers used for winter heating will be dismantled in favor of collective combined power and heat generation facilities, and the use of natural gas, the spokesman said. The cost of building the combined power and heat generation plants was estimated at 4 billion yuan, said the spokesman. In addition, 47 polluting factories would be moved from urban areas while 20 would be upgraded to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions, he said.

Sustainable Transport Award to Guangzhou, China

Link to the article @ National Geographic

*********

The award-winning transport system in Guangzhou, in south China's Guangdong province, includes not only Bus Rapid Transit but wide, tree-lined bicycle lanes and a tie-in to the large city's rail network.

Photograph by Li Huang, Color China Photo/AP

By Josie Garthwaite

For National Geographic News

Published January 24, 2011

This story is part of a special series that explores energy issues. For more, visit The Great Energy Challenge.

A bike-sharing program, wide bicycle lanes lined with trees, and a huge bus system that ties in with the city rail network are all part of the recipe for a winning transportation system in Guangzhou, China, according to the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP).

ITDP, an international nonprofit that works with cities on projects to reduce greenhouse gases and improve the quality of urban life, named Guangzhou the winner of its 2011 Sustainable Transport Award at a ceremony Monday night in Washington, D.C.

Guangzhou clinched the prize, said Jessica Morris, senior program director for ITDP, largely because it surpassed expectations. The bus rapid transit system, which opened in February 2010, "carries an awful lot of people," as many as 800,000 a day, she said, making it one of the world's largest. Perhaps more importantly, the new bus system "hooks up seamlessly" with rail as well as "idyllic" bicycle paths and bike-sharing stations, and helps to make the city "more livable."

Serving More Than The Economy

ITDP has been working closely with Guangzhou to build out the bus and bike infrastructure, she said, and the city's recent transportation efforts make it a place that "goes against the idea of a burgeoning Chinese metropolis that's only serving the economy." Experts say that easing congestion and reducing pollution from the transportation sector in China—with its increasingly urban and car-buying population—will require coordination of land-use planning, information technology, and mass-transit development, as well as cleaner vehicles.

(Read more on China’s efforts here: "On China’s Roads and Rails, a Move To Greener Transit.")

Zhong-Ren Peng, who chairs the University of Florida's Department of Urban and Regional Planning and is an expert in transportation planning in China, noted in an email that Guangzhou did much work in transportation and planning in preparation for serving as host to the 16th annual Asian Games in November, just as Shanghai did in preparation for last year's World Expo.

The projects and progress that ITDP seeks to reward are about more than going green. According to Morris, the committee of organizations assembled to nominate and select cities for the prize look for three factors in a "sustainable" transportation system: The system should benefit both the city’s environment and its economy, and it should be equitable, meaning "you should be able to move about your city regardless of income level," she explained.

In recent years, the Sustainable Transport Award has gone to New York in the United States; Paris, France; Guayaquil, Ecuador; Seoul, South Korea; and Bogotá, Colombia. Ahmadabad, India, snagged the award last year for opening what the ITDP described as the country's first full bus rapid transit system.

This year, Guangzhou beat out nominees León, Guanajuato, Mexico; Lima, Peru; Nantes, France; and Tehran, Iran, where the "local climate, topography, and sharp growth in private cars have all conspired to create a lingering air-quality emergency over the city," said Lloyd Wright, Executive Director of Viva Cities, in a news release about the nominations.

Tehran's Effort Amid Controversy

Each of the nominated cities took steps in 2010 to shake up its transportation system, according to ITDP. Tehran's journey has been particularly fraught with controversy, as President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Tehran Mayor Mohammed Baqer Qalibaf have clashed over funding for an expanded underground rail system. One of the world's most densely populated metropolitan areas, Tehran also introduced congestion charging and expanded its bus rapid transit. "Even more boldly," according to the ITDP, Tehran's government has "begun the process of reducing fuel subsidies."

Over the weekend, however, the Tehran-e Emrouz newspaper reported that the Iran Foreign Ministry had denied Qalibaf permission to travel to the United States for Monday's conference.

Nantes made it into the ITDP's top five for its efforts to integrate bus and tramway systems, while also promoting bicycling. In Lima, a "long-awaited" first step toward "creating an integrated citywide sustainable transport system," came in the form of a new bus rapid transit system. And León has boosted rail and bus ridership while keeping the portion of trips taken by bicycle or on foot among the largest of any Latin American city at more than 39 percent, according to the ITDP.

Jiangping Zhou, ITDP's Policy Director in Beijing, believes Guangzhou’s efforts could be replicated in other Chinese cities. "If something can happen there," he said, "it can happen in Shanghai and Beijing."

Soot Strategies in China !!

Global efforts to mitigate climate change are beginning to take aim at a once-obscure pollutant called “black carbon” in a shift that may bring policies to cool the planet to families preparing meals at home and farmers readying plots of land for planting.

Research shows that black carbon is also heavily impacting the glaciers of the Himalayas, another region of global significance. The “third pole” or “Asian water tower” feeds some of the world’s biggest rivers, including the Ganges, Yangtze and Yellow River, which together supply drinking water and crop-irrigation for some 1.5 billion people across 10 countries. According to estimates published last year in the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, black-carbon emissions have caused nearly 10% of the ice-cover loss in the Himalayas from 1990 to 2000, of which about 36% is attributed to Indian coal and biofuel burning.

Read the full article @ China Dialogue, January 19th, 2011 - Soot Strategies.

Who's More Toxic - China or India?

A very interesting article from Washington Post.

******
By Brian Palmer
Tuesday, December 14, 2010; E03

Politicians opposed to unilateral reductions in U.S. greenhouse-gas emissions often claim that China and India are the real problem. Some have even supported legislation barring federal regulation of carbon dioxide emissions until the world's most populous nations do the same. China and India are always lumped together. But which of the two countries is more dangerous to the environment?

Before pitting Asia's behemoths against one another in a cage match of environmental destruction, we should note that Westerners remain unsurpassed in the field. Take, for instance, greenhouse-gas emissions. As of 2007, the average American was responsible for 19.8 metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually, with Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians in hot pursuit. China (at 4.7 metric tons per person) and India (1.2 metric tons) lag far behind. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, neither country is likely to surpass the United States for decades.

It also bears mentioning that China produces one-third of its CO2 emissions manufacturing goods for export. Forty percent of the consumer goods purchased in the United States are made in China, representing more than 18 percent of China's total exports. So blaming China for climate change is a bit like blaming your chauffeur for using so much gas.

But if forced to choose between the rising Asian powers, China is clearly poised to do more environmental damage over the next few decades than India. Although its per-capita emissions are lower, China surpassed the United States as the largest total emitter of greenhouse gases in 2007. India is in fourth place, with less than one-third the output of China.

To boot, China's upward trend in emissions is the steepest in the world. In 2000, China consumed just 9 percent of the world's energy. By 2007, that share had reached 16 percent. India's share of global energy consumption, in contrast, rose from 3 percent to 4 percent during the same period.

Although India's population is growing faster than China's, that difference isn't nearly enough to offset the widening gap between the two countries in per-capita emissions. According to some estimates, the two countries will have approximately the same population in 2035, about 1.49 billion residents each. But China will be responsible for more than six times as much carbon dioxide emissions as India. Fifteen years later, when India has 191 million more people than China, China will still emit 10 billion more metric tons of CO2 than India. That difference is the equivalent of putting 1.9 billion extra cars on the road - three times the number currently in use worldwide.

Of course, there's more to environmental health than carbon dioxide. Pollution plagues many Indian and Chinese cities, but again, China appears to have it worse. According to a 2007 study by the Blacksmith Institute, an environmental research organization, China is home to six of the world's 30 most polluted cities, while four are in India.

Linfen has become the poster child for polluted Chinese cities, a blighted industrial burg that suggests a post-apocalyptic nightmare. Unregulated coal mines, steel factories and refineries have left half of the town's well water unsafe to drink, and cancer rates are way above average.

India, though not at China's levels of air pollution, still has little to brag about. The number of cars in India increases by 20 percent every year, and its government set fuel-economy standards for the first time this year.

Yet, despite its surging environmental exploitation, China may be better poised than India to address pollution and climate change.

Authoritarian governments can really get things done when they want to. Take the Olympics. The government relocated nearly 15,000 residents, some allegedly without their consent, just to build a few sports venues. India, with its raucous democracy and robust access to the court system, struggled not to embarrass itself when hosting the considerably lower-profile Commonwealth Games.

So if the Chinese Communist Party ever decides the country is going to clean up its act environmentally, it's likely to happen. (The closest thing India has to an environmental dictator is its Supreme Court, which unilaterally capped the number of auto rickshaws in Delhi in 1997 and then forced them to switch to clean natural gas by 2002 to clear the capital's air.)

China has also made massive investments in clean energy. The country increased its wind-power output more than 20-fold between 2003 and 2008 and plans to increase that by eightfold again by 2020. India just doesn't have the cash for initiatives like that. Its per-capita GDP is less than half of China's, and it is growing more slowly: 6.4 percent in 2009 compared with China's 8.7 percent.

Economists are closely watching the environmental policies of both rising powers, because they represent test cases of the controversial environmental Kuznets curve, which hypothesizes that environmental improvements in a country will occur after per-capita income increases.

Early proponents of the theory in the 1990s argued that economic development is a prerequisite for responsible environmental stewardship. In the coming years, we'll find out whether the race for Asian economic supremacy is a race to the bottom or to the top for the environment.

Palmer, a regular contributor to The Post's How and Why column, also contributes to the Explainer column at Slate.com.

5 things for cutting coal consumption

Article from the Daily Green

There is good news and bad news this Thanksgiving weekend on the climate stewardship front.

Bad news first. Despite the economic slowdown, the atmosphere's greenhouse gas concentration rose in 2009, due in large part to the coal-stoked economic growth in China and India, home to 40 percent of humanity. Some 92 percent of the growth in coal-fired emissions during 2007-2009 was a result of coal burning in China and India.

It has to be some sort of cosmic joke that two of the world's fastest growing economies also hold an estimated 21 percent of the world's dirtiest fuel. Must be the same prankster who put more than half of the world's proven oil reserves beneath the sands of the world's most geopolitically unstable region.

Anyway…China's coal hunger is driving exports from coal-mongers in Australia, South Africa, and the U.S. - where a battle is brewing over a proposed coal loading port on the Columbia River between Washington and Oregon.

The China/India coal binge will be grist for the mill of can't-do politicians who insist that the U.S. cannot stem the rise of greenhouse gas emissions and shouldn't try.

Oh, but it can, and here's the good news to ponder while downing another turkey sandwich and another slice of leftover pumpkin pie. A new report from Deutsche Bank, an investment house, points out that mortality is creeping up on many of the coal-fired power plants in the U.S.

Nearly half of the nation's coal-fired generating capacity is made up of aging, inefficient plants, some more than 60 years old. If utilities can be confident that the price of gas won't spike up and down with abandon, and if the specter of Congress - some day, by and by - putting a price on carbon enters into their calculus, then utilities looking to replace geezer coal plants might turn to gas, renewables, and nuclear, which could drive down coal's share of U.S. electricity generation by more than half.

Here's the paydirt conclusion: "The U.S. is capable of almost halving its CO2 emissions by 2030 (up to 44 percent) through a secure and reliable fuel mix that is based on known technology that can easily be deployed at reasonable cost." Without a price on carbon.

Of course, a number of things would have to go right for this happy scenario to play out.

• Utilities would have to be convinced that gas is a safer economic bet than coal for replacing their old coal beaters.
• The Environmental Protection Agency would have to implement pending air quality regulations - e.g. mercury limits - without political interference from congressmen putting dollars and cents above public health.
• Gas producers tapping shale deposits would have to avoid mucking up drinking water aquifers and stirring up implacable opposition from communities in the shale gas belts.
• Energy efficiency would have to continue improving so as to tamp down demand growth.
• And renewables and nuclear would need practical solutions to their issues; renewables with integrating a high level of on-again, off-again resources into the grid, nukes with their accumulating quantities of spent fuel all dressed up with nowhere to go.

Still, a promising take-home message is that market dynamics might go a long way toward lowering U.S. emissions, even if congressmen are content to spend their time and salaries over the next several years playing schoolyard political games.

And there's one more thing to ponder. Not everyone is buying it, but there are a few voices popping up from the wilderness arguing that conventional estimates of coal reserves overstate the quantity and heat content of coal that's still in the ground, which they say calls into question the assertion that coal will be cheap and abundant for decades to come.

China is clearly worried that its demand is outrunning its domestic supply; a recent Wall Street Journal article detailed talk in Beijing of capping domestic output, fretting over supply bottlenecks, and concerns about the lower quality of coal in frontier mining regions compared to older coal production regions that face depletion.

There are spots of tarnish emerging on King Coal's crown. As the end approaches for 2010, a thoroughly disappointing year for climate stewardship, the signs that all might not be well for dirty coal bear watching.

China's Urban Low Carbon Future in Shanghai

Article from World Changing on November 1st, 2010

********

The Shanghai Expo officially closed yesterday with pomp, circumstance, and a confirmation of the city as the planet's primary hope for a low-carbon future.

"Eco-friendly development and dissemination of renewable energy sources and new materials will influence the way we live and will lead the course of industrial development in the future," said China's Premier Wen Jiabao to the closing Expo Summit contingent of domestic and foreign dignitaries (eight heads of state), Nobel Prize winners and business leaders.

The World Expo, the world's largest in history with 73 million attending, for the first time in 159 years focused on cities, sustainable ones that is. China's plans for 350-600 million more urban residents by 2050 threatens to tip the earth's scales in terms of climate change and the economy so much that China is now focused on a fifth global industrial wave: the low-carbon or green economy.

"The low-carbon economy is a new industrial revolution," said Sir Nicholas Stern, Chairman of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics. "Low-carbon growth is cleaner, safer, far more attractive while high-carbon growth will kill itself. China is well placed for this industrial revolution."

Stern, author of the groundbreaking 2006 "Stern Review: the Economics of Climate Change", was referring to China's new national pilot program announced this summer by its all-powerful National Development Reform Commission for five low-carbon provinces and eight low-carbon cities.

One of the low-carbon cities, Baoding, for instance, within the last three years added 20,000 new jobs in wind, PV solar ( the city of one million is home to Yingli Solar, among other renewable start-ups), and other renewable energy technologies. It's also the site of large-scale energy efficiency and renewable energy installations in everything from building-integrated solar to streetlights. The new national pilot programs are expected to pick up the pace and provide a template for the rest of the nation's provincial and city low-carbon transformations.

Throughout its six-month run, the Shanghai Expo featured numerous forums on urban sustainability. Meanwhile, its pavilions employed many new green technologies in design and architecture. More than 500 new technologies in solar, heat pumps, energy efficiency, transportation and advanced material were developed as part of the Expo, according to ShiFang Tang, Technical Office Vice Director for the Shanghai Expo Bureau.

The massive China Pavilion and the country's "theme" pavilions on sustainable cities and urban best practices repeatedly and effectively emphasized how the challenges of climate change, pollution and growing consumer consumption can be met with more advanced urban planning, green technology innovation and citizen education.

The displays and creativity were the best I've experienced, anywhere, in terms of sustainability information, education and multi-media. For instance, one entire building was devoted to four real families living in the cities of four different contenents, Australia, North America, Africa and China. The exhibit demonstrated through video, waxed figures (the mostly Chinese crowds especially loved these) and other physical displays how each family lived and what they did for work, fun, and school. At the same time it taught people experiencing the multi-level walk-through how much each family consumed in terms of resources, even land, and how that impacted climate change; carbon or ecological footprinting education for the masses.

The takeaway is that China is serious about climate change as a threat to the world and itself, and it intends to capitalize on this inevitability with all its might. China's National Development Reform Commsision's low carbon pilot projects comprise 27 percent of the nation's population, and about one-third of its total economic output. The new low-carbon pilot projects span not only provincial and city planning and operations, but also industrial, economic and social planning, including education. In short, the whole ball of wax: "China will accelerate the model of sustainable development where nature, the planet and people can survive and thrive," said China's Premier Wen Jiabao at the Expo Summit's closing ceremonies.

It will be a tough path, indeed. Only one day after industrial controls were lifted that were in place for six months during the Expo in order to reduce regional air pollution, the air quality in Shanghai has already gone from crystal clear to disturbingly smoggy. As Stern pointed out to a rapt audience at the Shanghai Expo Summit, China will need to reduce its projected total greenhouse gas emissions from 35 billion tons in 2030 to 20 billion tons by 2050 if the world will have any chance of realizing the 2 degree Celsius maximum global temperature increase agreed to with the 2009 Copenhagen Accord.

China, if it continues on its current trajectory of yearly greenhouse gas emission increases, will by 2030, according to Stern, account for 50 percent of the world's greenhouse gas "budget" under Copenhagen while being home to only 17-18 percent of the world's population.

"New green investments will help China continue its lead in the green race that has already begun," Stern predicted. "Green policies are at the heart of the 12th Five-year Plan (the nation's economic master plan for the near future, a new version which was recently drafted), showing the world what is possible."

Meanwhile, Shanghai, China's largest and most cosmopolitan city, is deconstructing many of its Expo buildings for reuse in other parts of the nation, and also for other bidders outside China so that its Expo theme of "Better City, Better Life" gets a second and maybe even more lives.

Warren Karlenzig is president of Common Current, an internationally active consultancy based in San Anselmo, California. He is a Fellow at the Post-Carbon Institute and co-author of a forthcoming United Nations manual on global sustainable city planning and management.

Air Pollution in China !!

An article published in The Economist on August 5th, "Pollution in China" is very intriguing, especially the image published below.



The picture presents the percentage of clean air days in Beijing, accounted in terms of air quality index.

Residents of Beijing, who hoped the clear skies they enjoyed during the 2008 Olympic Games would persist, have also resumed their grumbling. Smog is back with a vengeance. A stimulus-encouraged car-buying spree has further clogged city streets. Provinces around Beijing account for much of China’s recent record levels of (air-fouling) steel and coke production.

Definitely, during the Olympic Games, the city experienced the best of the clean air days, for a number of reasons, including stringent regulations for multiple sectors to ensure the same (see UNEP Assessment report), but since then it has deteriorated gradually.

The impact of air pollution on the human health and the ecosystem is increasingly being linked to the growing transport sector.

Another article in the Economist, praised the efforts of China in promoting the electric motor cycles, which provide 30-50 kilometers for a fraction of the cost of the fuel spent in the regular motorcycle. The charging takes 5-8 hours, depending on the battery power, but the travel is safer and faster than the regular bicycles, and the environment is clean.

In 2008, 21 million electric bicycles were sold in China. Were there any subsides involved? Chinese makers are also in the business plug-in hybrids, expecting to sell at least 400,000 in 2009.

Henry Li, the head of BYD Auto's export and trade division (China) says, "We are not trying to save the world, we are making money. Our strategy aims to give value to shareholders. If we can help the planet at the same time, all the better" and well positioned to be the World's Leader in electric cars (NY Times).

Yes, we need to find ways to power these vehicles. Power plants are an option (in spite of Dr. Hansen saying no to them). As far as the air pollution is concerned, emissions of PM, SO2, NOx, and the likes are easy to control at a power plant than emitted at the ground level and into our noses on a road (and causing more health damage). The pollution out of a power plant stack disperses farther than the emissions out of a car or a bus.

There is silver bullet to cure air pollution.. more awareness is required on the sources and mitigation at the source is the best solution !!

Black Lungs: Hidden Cost of Coal Mining !!

It is well established that the coal mining ravages the land and leads to immense ecological damage, estimated by some to coast china ~7% of GDP. There is yet another hidden toll: the health hazards suffered by millions of coal miners. At least a quarter million have died in the last six decades as result of mining. Here is a trailer and see the full video @ Asia Society.

In News.. China: Air Quality, Energy & Transport

NewYorker, December 21st, 2009
Green Giant - Beijing’s crash program for clean energy.

CCTV, China, December 12th, 2009
New electric bikes rules controversial.

China Dialogue, December 10th, 2009
How to cooperate on climate.

Center for American Progress, November 4th, 2009
Cooperation between China and US Is the Key.

Financial Times, December 15th, 2009
China pressed to reveal numbers.

China Daily, December 16th, 2009
Jam will lead to more pollution.

China Daily, December 16th, 2009
4 m cars to bring problems.

Belfer Center, November, 2009
Breaking the Climate Impasse with China: A Global Solution.

Wall Street Journal, December 16th, 2009
World's Top Polluter Emerges as Green-Technology Leader.

PNAS, December 8th, 2009
Black soot and the survival of Tibetan glaciers.

Energy Tribune, December 15th, 2009
China Puts Coal (Lots of it) in Copenhagen’s Stocking.

CNN, December 15th, 2009
Choking in China's polluted city.

NPR, December 16th, 2009
China Refuses To Put Climate Commitment In Writing.

Also see previous posts

• Beijing Cars = 4 Million in December, 2009
• Beijing to Delhi - Traffic problems highlighted
• Lord Nick Stern Comparing China and the Western World
• Clear Skies and Hazy Data - China & India
• Mortality due to air pollution
• Air Quality Index (AQI) in urban centers
• New report shows widespread air quality manipulation
• Articles on air pollution and climate change by "China Dialogue"
• Beijing announced cleanest month in 9 years
• Environmental assessment of Beijing 2008 Olympic Games (UNEP)
• Dust Storms, Fires, and Haze Pollution in Asia
• Particulate Pollution in Asia
  
• More new cars are registered in 2009 in Beijing, China
  
• Transport Emissions Inventory for China
• Photo Diary of Air Pollution in Beijing
• Sensing air quality in Beijing (Interactive Maps)
• Beijing still hazy !!
• Air pollution in Beijing

Beijing Cars = Four Million in December 2009

An article in Examiner states that the Beijing car population will reach the four million mark in December 2009 and the city averaged ~2,000 cars a day in 2009 to reach the mark. And yet, the authorities claim that "it was confident that the city’s air pollution wouldn’t worsen as the number of cars increased".

Call me lame, but I do not understand the math here. If something is polluted, and if you are adding something to the system without purging the old, how is this not worsening?

1. City just added 1 million cars in less than 28 months. Even if the new cars are Euro-IV complaint, they are still emitting something. What about all the cars that are pre-Euro IV, which are still on the road.

2. If the cars were running normally, then OK, at least they are serving the mobility function, but not if they are sitting in congestion. Our calculations show, on average a 20 min idling in the city can lead to an addition of up to 10 percent of the emissions which could have been avoided.

Get out of the cars. The air pollution (and other emissions linked to climate change) is severe along the corridors and worse during the rush hours, mostly due to congestion and idling emissions. A lot of energy is wasted every where, in US, China, Europe, India, and the rest of the World.



See a review of air pollution from transport sector in China in SIM-air working paper No.19.

Frequently Asked Questions: (5) Is Transport the Main Culprit of Air Pollution?

A common question with a difficult answer of “it depends”. Yes, the transport is growing rapidly in most of the developing country cities and the quotient its contribution to local and global air pollution problems is also increasing significantly. Yet, the answer lies in the mathematics of the points raised in the earlier questions.

On one side, the visibility of the growing sector creates an atmospheric cloud that multiples its contribution. Since the people are spending more time on the roads, because of traveling or due to sitting in a congestion zone, tend to experience the most and in such situations, the contribution of transport seem like the main culprit.

Yes, along the main corridors of the major cities, the contribution of the transport sector is the main culprit. However, city as a whole, it is important that a holistic picture and understanding of the sources (including the domestic and industrial) is established before a decision is made on the contribution (source apportionment).

For example, during the Olympics, the city of Beijing, did not achieve the reductions in the air pollution levels by cutting the vehicular fleet by half for the games period. They were able to achieve this reduction in conjunction with closing down a number of small and large industrial sites in the city.

Now, the long range transport plays a critical role. The transport emissions are ground based and tend to increase the local concentrations significantly. However, the industrial sector contributes farther distances. And for pollutants like sulfur dioxide, the transport quotient is even higher and this was also evident in Beijing during the games. A series of measures, based on the modeling studies, resulted in closing down of industries in the neighboring cities, to achieve the necessary air pollution reductions during the Olympic Games.

So, transport is an important culprit, but not necessarily the main culprit at all times.

Another example is Delhi. In 2001-02, while the bus fleet was being converted from diesel to CNG, a major intervention in the industrial sector was to relocate a significant number of smelters out of the city limits, which resulted in significant reductions. However, all the reduction are wiped out due to large increase in the car population; different story !!

See AQM in Delhi - Then, Now, and Next.
See Beijing to Delhi - Traffic problems highlighted
See Nano-carnomics in Urban India

See other FAQ's.

Lord Nick Stern Comparing China and the Western World

This article is from Wall Street Journal "Stern Truths: Some Parts of China Have Western-Style Emissions" and an interesting comment below.

**************
When it comes to comparing countries’ greenhouse-gas emissions, lots of developing countries prefer to use per-capita emissions, rather than absolute emissions. That makes India and China look pretty tame, and countries such as the U.S. and Australia pretty awful.

Plenty of rich-country diplomats bristle at such talk, most recently Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in India. Today in Beijing, Nicholas Stern offered another reason why per-capita emissions might not be a very useful yardstick.

Lord Stern, the former chief economist of the World Bank and author of a reknowned report on the cost of tackling climate change, was speaking in Beijing today. Much of his talk revolved around the usual climate-speak: China has to play ball one way or another with global efforts to tackle climate change, and the West can help China get there.

But he also noted something important: There are parts of China that are starting to look very Western indeed—when it comes to the amount of greenhouse gases they produce. AFP reports:

“There are many parts of China where emissions intensity and emissions per capita are looking much like some of the richer countries in Europe,” [Lord Stern] said in a speech that laid out his predictions on global warming.

He said there are 13 regions with higher per-capita emissions than France, and six with higher per-capita emissions than the U.K. (None, apparently, have yet caught up with Australian or American levels.) These are the countries, remember, that are being asked to underwrite China’s transition to a cleaner economy. Lord Stern has also come out lately in favor of the West paying for emissions from Chinese factories, and also for limiting atmospheric carbon-dioxide levels to 350 parts per million, a really tall order.

Why does the regional difference matter? Those “dirtier” regions are presumably the more urban and industrialized bits of China, precisely the parts of the country responsible for the bulk of China’s absolute greenhouse-gas emissions and economic growth. They are also the regions expected to grow the most through migrations from the countryside over the next 20 years.

In other words, when it comes to the global climate debate, there’s not one “China,” with a relatively low level of greenhouse-gas emissions which could grow by leaps and bounds before ever coming close to American or European levels of emissions.

There are several Chinas—and one, in particular, is already on par with rich countries which do have obligations under the Kyoto Protocol to reduce emissions and which are being asked to shoulder much of the burden of China’s economic transformation.

Something to keep in mind as the climate-policy poker game continues in the months before the big December summit in Copenhagen.

***********
A comment on the WSJ blog:

That fact that anyone believes there is a single China on anything is still one of the more interesting pieces of this debate.

OF COURSE Shanghai, Beijing, Guangzhou are going to have the highest contribution from a personal consumption sense. these are properous cities where residents began driving cars, buying larger reseidential properties, and enjoying the life of happy consumers before anyone else.

Take a deeper dive, and there are probably 15-20 other cities who are the provincial capitals (Nanjing, Tianjin, Chengdu, Xian, Wuhan, Xiamen, etc) that are growing at rates (GDP, buildings, and people) faster than the first three mentioned. These are the cities that are going to absorb the next 400 million that are expecteed to move to the city over the next 15-20 years.

Dive a bit deeper than that though, and that is where you will find American emissions. Not American “like” emissions”. America’s Emissions. Call it a carbon trade if you like, but a visit to the city of Shantou, Foshan, Dongguan, or any one of China’s industrial clusters, and one will find goods that are being produced for American consumers in carbon belching factories. Many of which are American owned and managed.

Which brings me to the point that the previous anon poster made. Per capita carbon rates are not an accurate measure of anything excepted the media’s misunderstanding of the issues. On the one hand, no one is calculation the carbon footprint of American consumers that can be found in China’s factories, and no one is accurately determining the various carbon footprints that exist in China…. and those are just two of the major adulterations that exist before you take into consieration the fact that carbon readings from either State as a whole are just guesses.

Where that leaves us in the COP15 is in a position where little will be achieved. there are rumors of a backroom deal between the US and China on developing technologies, but if anyone is looking for a “cap” and “trade” deal, I think they should look elsewhere. The two States operate in different realities of the same issue, so developing a solution is near impossible when only focusing on “carbon” as it is not the real problem.. it is the byproduct of many problems.