Starting today (June 18th) China will start using markets to "help meet more greenhouse
gas targets." with 635 companies.
They are working in a few regions to set up a national carbon market that will slow emissions.
"First, they can meet their targets by reducing their own emissions—by investing in energy efficiency, say, or curbing production.
Alternatively, they can buy carbon allowances or credits from companies that have spare allowances or from projects elsewhere in China."
Other issue's and problems are discussed in the article, here.
| Create a Free Account or Sign In to connect and share in green living and alternative energy forum discussions. |
1
A step in the right direction for China; reducing carbon.
Started by Shortpoet-GTD, Jun 18 2013 05:07 PM
emissions co-2 carbon
11 replies to this topic
#2
Posted 24 June 2013 - 10:48 AM
Not a fan of carbon trading, too easy to corrupt. Either hard limits via an EPA structure or a carbon tax would make more sense. It will be interesting to see what they do with it considering their past history of corruption.
#3
Posted 24 June 2013 - 11:47 AM
Phil, on 24 June 2013 - 10:48 AM, said:
Not a fan of carbon trading, too easy to corrupt. Either hard limits via an EPA structure or a carbon tax would make more sense. It will be interesting to see what they do with it considering their past history of corruption.
But with more and more millions of Chinese becoming discontent with the lack of focus and the horrible air quality
conditions, there massive numbers may change things?
Hard to say.
I'm sure they're asking, what good is a middle income way of life when we can't breathe?
#4
Posted 24 June 2013 - 12:19 PM
Right now they have peasants rioting for their piece of the middle class pie, hence the cheap energy and rapid growth path. It will be interesting if there will be middle class riots over air quality. That would really put them between a rock and a hard place! :<) China's #1 concern is stability so they will follow what ever path brings them the most.
The light bulb finally went on over there when they found out stimulus doesn't work so now they are having to deal with economic reality, just as we are now that Bernake signaled he is going to turn off the spigot, (check the stock market lately?). It remains to be seen if they will double down on cheap energy to spur more real growth. That would be the easiest path for them. That may also be why they chose cap and trade over hard limits, it will allow them to continue to pollute just paying a higher price for doing so.
The light bulb finally went on over there when they found out stimulus doesn't work so now they are having to deal with economic reality, just as we are now that Bernake signaled he is going to turn off the spigot, (check the stock market lately?). It remains to be seen if they will double down on cheap energy to spur more real growth. That would be the easiest path for them. That may also be why they chose cap and trade over hard limits, it will allow them to continue to pollute just paying a higher price for doing so.
#5
Posted 24 June 2013 - 03:34 PM
Phil, on 24 June 2013 - 12:19 PM, said:
It remains to be seen if they will double down on cheap energy to spur more real growth.
http://www.altenergy...les-won-anyway/
#6
Posted 25 June 2013 - 09:42 AM
Don't know what that has to do with China but as I've always said, ignore propaganda from both sides, ignore intentions, it's results that matter. The results are that none of the republican led states have reduced support for renewables and the TEA party is working to get them expanded. In point of fact, many republican states are very high on renewables, while democrat Illinois is heavily reliant on coal.
Pigeon holing groups only makes enemies out of potential allies, counterproductive to say the least.
Pigeon holing groups only makes enemies out of potential allies, counterproductive to say the least.
#7
Posted 25 June 2013 - 06:00 PM
Phil, on 25 June 2013 - 09:42 AM, said:
Don't know what that has to do with China but as I've always said, ignore propaganda from both sides, ignore intentions, it's results that matter. The results are that none of the republican led states have reduced support for renewables and the TEA party is working to get them expanded. In point of fact, many republican states are very high on renewables, while democrat Illinois is heavily reliant on coal.
Pigeon holing groups only makes enemies out of potential allies, counterproductive to say the least.
Pigeon holing groups only makes enemies out of potential allies, counterproductive to say the least.
They'd probably disown their own mothers if they found out that she liked Obama; that's at the heart of it-
they hate him so much, they don't care what happens to America as a result.
Local republicans don't have to deal with that at all and can move forward.
#8
Posted 26 June 2013 - 01:11 PM
Is your hatred of Bush/Cheney any less intense? From their view it is Obama destroying the nation, that he is doing what he wants and doesn't care what happens to America as a result. In the seven years since progressives took over congress, have the rich only gotten richer while the poor gotten poorer? Have deficits gone through the roof? The road to hell is paved with good intentions, it's results that matter.
You can hate what someone does without hating the person. Boehner and Obama are golf buddies after all! :<) Reagan and Tip O'Neil were great friends though they tore into each other regularly while on the job.
On the national level republicans removed the $2000 limit for renewable energy tax credits, they signed off on Bush's $270 billion to jump start hydrogen, and most recently they renewed the wind energy tax credit.
I think what you seem to be missing is the concept of bargaining chips. The environment is republicans bargaining chips, the military is democrats bargaining chips. When republicans come out with some statements it's to start the negotiations, just like when democrats come out with some statements. Both sides know we need a viable military, both know we need alternative energy, that's why after much political blustering energy incentives get approved along with military budgets. Until you understand it's all a game for the cheap seats, you'll keep falling for the BS. :<O
As for me I'd say a pox on both their houses. ;<)
You can hate what someone does without hating the person. Boehner and Obama are golf buddies after all! :<) Reagan and Tip O'Neil were great friends though they tore into each other regularly while on the job.
On the national level republicans removed the $2000 limit for renewable energy tax credits, they signed off on Bush's $270 billion to jump start hydrogen, and most recently they renewed the wind energy tax credit.
I think what you seem to be missing is the concept of bargaining chips. The environment is republicans bargaining chips, the military is democrats bargaining chips. When republicans come out with some statements it's to start the negotiations, just like when democrats come out with some statements. Both sides know we need a viable military, both know we need alternative energy, that's why after much political blustering energy incentives get approved along with military budgets. Until you understand it's all a game for the cheap seats, you'll keep falling for the BS. :<O
As for me I'd say a pox on both their houses. ;<)
#9
Posted 26 June 2013 - 04:15 PM
Phil, on 26 June 2013 - 01:11 PM, said:
Is your hatred of Bush/Cheney any less intense?
I can't change your mind, nor will I try.
I wouldn't wish either one of them ill will but whoever donated their heart to chaney wasted a good heart.
#10
Posted 27 June 2013 - 08:35 AM
Nor can I change your mind. :<) The point is, focusing on differences builds enemies, cultivating similarities builds allies. Is your goal to build enemies or allies? Perhaps it's just me but peeing off half the population is no way to build consensus and move an agenda forward. :<O
#11
Posted 27 June 2013 - 01:39 PM
Phil, on 27 June 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:
Nor can I change your mind. :<) The point is, focusing on differences builds enemies, cultivating similarities builds allies. Is your goal to build enemies or allies? Perhaps it's just me but peeing off half the population is no way to build consensus and move an agenda forward. :<O
environment with their various bills over the years and I'll leave it at that.
There are exceptions of course
but it's hard to like a group of people that seem hell bent on the Earth's destruction through their greed
or lack of understanding.
There are r's that say the Earth is only 9,000 years old for example or that renewables will cost Americans
their jobs, that coal is clean and tar sands are necessary.
I judge politicians by their actions not their party. It's the fact that I agree more with democrat's on most things
doesn't mean I want to **** everyone off.
Can we get back to the topic now?
#12
Posted 29 June 2013 - 02:18 PM
Kyoto was effectively defeated in the senate 95-0, were they all republicans? http://www-pub.naz.e...nanatoli/us.htm
Democrats are already attacking Obama's war on coal along with republicans.
9,000 years old? Really???? And what percentage of conservatives believe that? Obama supports the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt who support Sharia law, reducing women to property. So I guess all D's want women to be property, right?
See the problem with propaganda? All heat, no light.
Renewables will cost jobs, it's unavoidable. Robots cost jobs, computers cost jobs, technology in most cases cost jobs. My solar panels were built once, shipped once, installed once by me, and are maintenance free for the next half century or more. Compare that to a coal mine that has to be continuously fed. Even utility scale solar requires minimal maintenance.
Fiscal conservatives believe that the economy has to come first, it is rich countries that can afford green, not poor countries. That's why poor countries are demanding we pay them to go green. In my view, democrats are destroying the economy and that makes it harder for people to afford solar. Increasing the price of gas and electricity just leaves less money in the hands of people, making it less likely they can afford new efficient appliances, LED bulbs, hybrids, etc.
Many believe environmentalism trumps the economy or worse, that somehow green energy can jumpstart the economy. There is simply no economic basis for this, it's just wishful thinking.
We can have a valid disagreement about this without demonizing either side.
So back to the topic. The fact remains that China is #1 in new coal plants by a wide margin and is actively cultivating their own coal supplies. This virtually guarantees their CO2 output will continue to increase over the next few decades. As I mentioned, next year will tell the tale on how many new coal plants they schedule. Right now the trend doesn't look good for China or India.
I think it was the book Eaarth that made the point if we shut down all coal plants tomorrow, the world would have replaced them all in seven years. A large part of that will be China.
Democrats are already attacking Obama's war on coal along with republicans.
9,000 years old? Really???? And what percentage of conservatives believe that? Obama supports the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt who support Sharia law, reducing women to property. So I guess all D's want women to be property, right?
See the problem with propaganda? All heat, no light.
Renewables will cost jobs, it's unavoidable. Robots cost jobs, computers cost jobs, technology in most cases cost jobs. My solar panels were built once, shipped once, installed once by me, and are maintenance free for the next half century or more. Compare that to a coal mine that has to be continuously fed. Even utility scale solar requires minimal maintenance.
Fiscal conservatives believe that the economy has to come first, it is rich countries that can afford green, not poor countries. That's why poor countries are demanding we pay them to go green. In my view, democrats are destroying the economy and that makes it harder for people to afford solar. Increasing the price of gas and electricity just leaves less money in the hands of people, making it less likely they can afford new efficient appliances, LED bulbs, hybrids, etc.
Many believe environmentalism trumps the economy or worse, that somehow green energy can jumpstart the economy. There is simply no economic basis for this, it's just wishful thinking.
We can have a valid disagreement about this without demonizing either side.
So back to the topic. The fact remains that China is #1 in new coal plants by a wide margin and is actively cultivating their own coal supplies. This virtually guarantees their CO2 output will continue to increase over the next few decades. As I mentioned, next year will tell the tale on how many new coal plants they schedule. Right now the trend doesn't look good for China or India.
I think it was the book Eaarth that made the point if we shut down all coal plants tomorrow, the world would have replaced them all in seven years. A large part of that will be China.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users