Greening Black

Take a look at these horrific photos of China's pollution (h/t PKD). Seriously, click that link. China's pollution woes are unimaginable for people in the West. But hopefully such dystopian pollution won't be the norm for too much longer.

From The New York Times:

MONTREAL — The staggering economic growth in China has come at a heavy cost, paid in severe contamination of the country’s air, soil and water. But now the Chinese government is aggressively pursuing more stringent environmental regulation, with a particular focus on water distribution and wastewater treatment.

Recent stimulus spending has opened up the Chinese market to green initiatives. And Canadian companies are responding to the call for advanced water treatment and reuse technology.

“It’s not well known that China has set aside more money for the adoption of clean technologies than any other country on the planet,” said Dallas Kachan, managing director of Cleantech Group in San Francisco, which tracks global investment in clean technologies.

The Chinese economic stimulus package of 4 trillion yuan, or $585 billion, announced a year ago, focused nearly 40 percent of its spending on environmental and energy-efficient projects.

...

China’s water shortage, especially in the northern part of the country, is driving a need for wastewater recycling. “Right now, only 30 to 40 percent of the wastewater gets treated in China,” said Steve Watzeck, president of engineered systems at G.E. Water. “But we understand that Beijing aims to reuse 100 percent of its wastewater by 2013. Implementing advanced wastewater reuse technologies is key to China’s continued industrial growth.”

China’s capability in clean water technology is still underdeveloped. But the country’s solar industry is an example of how quickly it can sprint to the fore. Mr. Kachan of Cleantech Group, points out that Suntech Power, the Chinese company that a year ago became the world’s leading maker of crystalline silicon solar modules, did not exist eight years ago.

Read the Entire Article

China has a long ways to go when it comes to its environment. I understand that the country has done a lot and appears to be doing more. But it still has a far, far way to go. Xi'an's perma-gray skies and oppressive air are things I'm not missing at all.

I like to see that China committed 40% of its stimulus to green growth. Where did America allocate its? Failed banks, Detroit, etc. As the film producer Robert Compton told me a few weeks ago, "China's stimulus is building while ours is bailing." Whereas I've criticized China in the past about saving face to the detriment of its economy and people, the United States could definitely be criticized for the same thing when it comes to shelling out billions to failed companies such as GM and AIG.

Americans, more and more, don't believe in global warming. I'm wondering if this attitude is going to lead us to continue the attitude that we'll be able to drill our way out of any future energy problems. It's apparent that a significant number of Americans already believe such will be the case. If this thinking continues, I have to think that America is going to be left behind.

Shanxi, Shaanxi, and many other Chinese provinces are going to continue to pump out coal and China is going to continue to get oil from Africa and the Middle East. But China does deserve credit for making efforts towards serious green growth.

The Other Side of Wind Power

China's been lauded a lot for its efforts in going green. Indeed, China does seem to be taking climate change seriously. But at the same time, China, and the rest of the world, have a long ways to go in terms of weening itself off of carbon-emitting energy sources.

From The Wall St. Journal:

Photo from CS Monitor

SHANGHAI—China's ambition to create "green cities" powered by huge wind farms comes with a dirty little secret: Dozens of new coal-fired power plants need to be installed as well.

Part of the reason is that wind power depends on, well, the wind. To safeguard against blackouts when conditions are too calm, officials have turned to coal-fired power as a backup.

China wants renewable energy like wind to meet 15% of its energy needs by 2020, double its share in 2005, as it seeks to rein in emissions that have made its cities among the smoggiest on Earth. But experts say the country's transmission network currently can't absorb the rate of growth in renewable-energy output. Last year, as much as 30% of wind-power capacity wasn't connected to the grid. As a result, more coal is being burned in existing plants, and new thermal capacity is being built to cover this shortfall in renewable energy.

In addition, officials want enough new coal-fired capacity in reserve so that they can meet demand whenever the wind doesn't blow. This is important because wind is less reliable as an energy source than coal, which fuels two-thirds of China's electricity output. Wind energy ultimately depends on wind strength and direction, unlike coal, which can be stockpiled at generators in advance.

Further complicating matters is poor connectivity between regional transmission networks, which makes it hard for China to move surplus power in one part of the country to cover shortfalls elsewhere.

China may not be alone in having to ramp up thermal power capacity as it develops wind farms. Any country with a combination of rapidly growing energy demand, an old and inflexible grid, an existing reliance on coal for power, and ambitious renewable energy-expansion plans will likely have a similar dilemma. What marks China out as different is the amount of new coal-fired capacity that needs to be added.

...

"China will need to add a substantial amount of coal-fired power capacity by 2020 in line with its expanding economy, and the idea is to bring some of the capacity earlier than necessary in order to facilitate the wind-power transmission," said Shi Pengfei, vice president of the Chinese Wind Power Association.

Read On

It's seeming more and more like significant steps towards actually getting away from our CO2-powered lives are not that close to becoming a reality.

That's unfortunate.

Carbon Capture

China is serious about reducing CO2 emissions through CO2-capture at coal-fired power plants.

From The New York Times and Climate Wire:

Image from New York Times

When European and Chinese scientists first agreed to collaborate on capturing carbon dioxide from power plants and storing it underground, China's entire carbon capture and sequestration "team" was composed of two Tsinghua University graduate students.

Less than five years later, the landscape is markedly different. China's first near-zero-emissions coal plant won state approval this month -- an apparent formality, since construction already is far under way. Two other pilots are in the works, including one in inner Mongolia that could be the largest sequestration project in the world. Conferences on carbon capture in China now routinely feature high-level government and industry leaders.

And one of those once-lowly grad students, analysts said, is among China's negotiators at the international forum of the world's 17 major economies meeting on energy issues next month in Mexico City.

"It's a definite shift in attitude," said Matthew Webb, coal campaign leader in Britain's Foreign and Commonwealth Office, who once led the ongoing attempts at cooperation between Europe and China on carbon capture and sequestration, or CCS.

"It's not political taboo anymore," he said. "It's a reality that needs to be addressed."

Read On

It's refreshing to see that the world has moved past the thinking that dominated the beginning of this decade. During that time period, we heard a lot of "we shouldn't get serious about climate change because the other side won't." How much of that was due to President Bush is debatable. Although I'd say that he had a great deal to do with this attitude.

I also like seeing that instead of an inconvenience, tackling climate change is being viewed as an opportunity. I see the development of a renewable energy and other technologies, like carbon capture, as great chances to do something productive with economies that have fallen off a cliff.

Clean coal has a wide range of issues. Ultimately, it may not be the best thing for humanity to embrace. Other truly renewable energy developments would seem to be ideal. Coal is king though. And it will be for some time. But the willingness to take the idea seriously across the globe, and especially in China and, hopefully, America, is a step in the right direction.

Serious Green Growth

I've talked a few times now about the status of US/China talks before this coming winter's Copenhagen Climate Summit. What happens over the coming months is, indeed, going to have major ramifications on the future of the planet.

I stumbled across an excellent report from The Center for American Progress by Julian Wong and Andrew Light from last week detailing what China is already doing and has already done with regards its development of clean energy.

Here is the opening section of the report:

A common refrain from climate action naysayers is that, "China is building two coal-fired power plants a week!" They insist that the United States should wait until this major emitter takes on binding commitments to climate change mitigation before it decides to adopt global warming pollution reduction policies in the American Climate and Energy Security Act (H.R. 2454). They "further claim that if such a bill became law, the United States would be transferring its jobs to countries such as China and India that are doing nothing to curb emissions. But that thinking is exactly wrong.

Critics fairly point to the fact that 80 percent of China’s power is derived from dirty coal, and that China recently surpassed the United States as the word’s largest emitter of carbon dioxide. Yet China’s per capita emissions remain a fifth that of the United States, and its historical cumulative per capita emissions from 1960 to 2005 are less than one-tenth that of the United States.

Still, the Chinese have recognized that it’s climate inaction—not climate legislation—that will lead to its own economic undoing. As the U.S. Congress debates the merits of enacting renewable electricity and energy efficiency standards, China has already forged ahead with building its own low-carbon economy, laying the foundation for clean-energy jobs and innovation.

China ranked second in the world in 2007 in terms of the absolute dollar amount invested in renewable energy, according to the Climate Group. It spent $12 billion, which put it just behind Germany’s $14 billion. These investments have placed China among the world leaders in solar, wind, electric vehicle, rail, and grid technologies. And now approximately 9 percent of China’s $586 billion economic stimulus package will go toward sustainable development (excluding rail and grid) projects.

China is expected to unveil in the coming weeks another extensive and unprecedented stimulus package—reported to be in the range of $440 billion to $660 billion—dedicated solely to new energy development over the next decade, including generous investments in wind, solar, and hydropower. If those expectations are fulfilled, China could emerge as the unquestioned global leader in clean-energy production, significantly increasing its chances to wean its energy appetite off coal, and at the same time ushering in an era of sustainable economic growth by exporting these clean-energy technologies to the world.

The bottom line: China is not there yet, but it is beginning to transition to a clean-energy economy through a wide range of actions. The United States should recognize China’s efforts and encourage China to expand upon them. We have sketched this claim before, but let’s run though the numbers in more detail.

Read On or Download the .pdf of the Memo

I encourage everyone reading this to click through on this link and check out what Wong and Light highlight that China has done. It is well-referenced and very insightful.

In my three years of blogging on China, I've gone on countless rants about how awful China's environmental degradation is. It is astounding. But there is obviously more than meets the eye when it comes to China's handling of its unprecedented environmental issues.

There is an interesting story about a speech Thomas Friedman gave a couple years ago in a recent Guardian article about China and its response to climate change:

Visiting China a couple of years ago, the American journalist Thomas Friedman conceded that, when it came to climate change, his hosts had a point. Yes, the west had grown rich using dirty old coal and oil, and the Chinese had the right to do the same. "Take your time!" he told a conference in Tianjin. "Because I think my country needs ... five years to invent all the clean power and energy efficiency tools that you, China, will need to avoid choking on pollution and then we are going to come over and sell them ... to you." It took a few moments for his words to be translated and land in delegates' headphones - and for the ripple of consternation to spread around the hall.

Two years on, Mr Friedman's lesson - that clean energy can be profitable rather than a costly drag - has not only been learned by the Chinese; now Beijing is intent on writing the rest of the textbook.

Read On

While the world needs to avoid blowing up another bubble, investment in the development of green energy technologies could be an excellent way to get through the financial crisis. China gets this. America doesn't.

China, with billions upon billions set to be invested in green technologies, is serious about doing something in the face of the climate change challenge. Will America change its traditional stance on the climate change issue and treat clean-energy develoment seriously? The answer to this question appears far from certain.

I like the conclusion of the report posted above:

What makes the above list of actions by China all the more impressive is that the country’s leaders decided to act unilaterally even though its per capita GDP and per capita emissions, both historical and present, remain a fraction of the United States'. China hasn’t done so out of charity, but out of recognition that doing so is both critical to its national security and a huge opportunity for future economic prosperity.

Sure, China can do more. But we can create a much more constructive platform for forging a consensus in Copenhagen or forming the basis for a bilateral agreement with China on climate change by acknowledging and understanding the effects of the full range of China’s climate actions outside of its lack of hard caps on carbon emissions. A more extensive analysis should quiet the naysayers on Capitol Hill that use the false excuse of Chinese inaction to block the passage of the historic climate and energy bill in the U.S. Congress.

China isn't getting serious about developing clean-energy to cover its share of the climate crisis or out of kindness. China's stepping up for selfish financial reasons. If America can't wrap its head around this idea, then it deserves to be passed up by the Chinese in the coming decades because it will be blowing a huge economic opportunity (as well as a chance to, you know, save the planet, but that's not important).

The Challenge of Fuel-Efficient Cars

As China gets richer, its people would like to have more comfortable cars.

From Reuters:

Image from Lamarguerite.wordpress.com

BEIJING (Reuters) - China's energy policymakers have lately been thinking a lot about drivers like 24-year-old Cindy Chen, who chose a larger German Opel over smaller, more fuel-efficient models when she bought her first car in March.

Like many motorists of the "single child" generation -- kids of baby boomers born in the 1950s -- Cindy is showing early signs of an American-style auto affair, heedless of Beijing tax breaks meant to encourage sales of smaller cars, whose market share grew to over two-thirds of all new car sales in the first quarter.

"Daddy bought it for me, so why not a big one?," said Cindy, a lawyer with a local government office in eastern Ningbo city.

But she will have fewer incentives to drive the way her American counterparts do after policymakers on Monday raised diesel and gasoline prices by 6 and 7 percent respectively, the second increase this year but the biggest since last June.

While some criticized it as a half-measure that barely matched half of the recent rise in global crude oil costs, the increase takes gasoline prices to near their peaks last June, in stark contrast to U.S. prices that are half last summer's highs and are now about 40 percent cheaper than Chinese pump rates.

Early anecdotal evidence suggests the shock of steadily rising prices this year may be causing car-owners to think twice before hitting the road after five years in which authorities sought to cushion the blow for consumers, adding to demand.

"I never really thought about petrol cost before. My panic about oil prices started last summer... Now my pay has not increased but oil went up again. I will certainly start to plan for driving nowadays, like a car pool if driving long distance," said Zhang Yun, who drives a 2.7-liter Hyundai Tucsan.

At stake is nothing less than the outlook for global oil prices, which have rallied in part on hopes for a sustained recovery in demand from No. 2 consumer China, where gasoline use has led the pick-up in consumption seen in recent weeks.

Read On

This discussion of Chinese gasoline prices reminds me of a blog post I read a few weeks ago from the relatively new and popular China blog - China Smack. Here is what a blogger there had to say about China's gas prices:

The above is States Average Gas Prices is “United States average gasoline prices”.

For example: Wyoming state 1.753, Wyoming (unit should be USD/gallon?)

If we use the foreign exchange rate I just checked: 1 USD = 6.8311 yuan RMB

And 1 gallon = 3.785 liters

Conversion (U.S.) price: ?

1.753 USD * 6.8311 / 3.785 liters = 3.16 yuan RMB / liter (American gasoline price)

According to what netizens have said today, Yichang’s 93 octane gasoline is approximately 5.20 yuan/liter??

Yichang (it is said that Beijing, etc. are even higher) gasoline prices compared to Wyoming state is higher by %
(5.2-3.16) / 3.16 * 100% = 2.04/3.16 * 100% = 65%! ! ! !

Our gasoline prices per liter is 2.04 yuan higher than the United States, exceeding 65%!!!

And they do not have grade one, grade two road fees, bridge fees, highway fees…

And their average wages are perhaps 10 times our average wages…

Read On

Obviously, this guy was not happy about the gouging he was feeling at the pump.

The only problem I have with the calculations done above is that taking Wyoming's gas prices may not be the best indicator for America's prices as a whole. Wyoming, in America's mountain west, has the lowest population of the entire country. Even lower than Alaska. So the prices in rural Wyoming are going to be lower than those in more populated areas.

But overall, the price of Chinese gasoline compared to American prices are way higher. But I also remember from studying abroad in Europe in 2003 that Europe's gasoline prices are also significantly higher than America's.

So this leads me to the question: is it really fair to compare China's gas prices to America's? Instead of China's prices being "too high," are America's prices "too low?"

Doing a quick Google search, I found this list of the countries with the most and least expensive gasoline prices in the world as of last summer. The results of the prices from major cities within the country, from promotionalcodes.org.uk, are interesting:

Most Expensive Countries
1. Oslo, Norway - $9.85/gallon
2. Paris, France - $9.43/gallon
3. Copenhagen, Denmark - $9.24/gallon
4. Rome, Italy - $9.03/gallon
5. London, England - $8.96/gallon

Least Expensive Countries
1. Caracas, Venezuela - $0.12/gallon (!!!)
2. Tehran, Iran - $0.41/gallon
3. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia - $0.47/gallon
4. Kuwait City, Kuwait - $0.92/gallon
5. Cairo, Egypt - $1.24/gallon

These prices were from when gasoline was at an all-time high last summer. So the prices will be off compared to what they are now. But I imagine that the rankings are still fairly similar. China and America aren't at the top or bottom of the world's prices. Although it does appear obvious from the China Smack calculations that America is more setup for "happy motoring" than China is.

With GM and Chrysler now bankrupt, the days of Americans truckin' around in SUVs may very well be over though.

There was an intelligent discussion of Detroit's bankruptcies on NPR's podcast "Planet Money" the other day. Frank Langfitt, an NPR correspondent, was present at the Chrysler bankruptcy hearings this past week. He had some really interesting insights on what is going on with the government's take over of Detroit.

Indeed, the American car industry as we knew it is long gone.

I'm going to transcribe a couple of the key points, but I really recommend that you listen to it for yourself here.

From a discussion between Laura Conaway and Frank Langfitt on the Planet Money podcast:

Langfitt: Now what the government always says is, "We don't want to run this company. We want auto executives to do it." At the same time, let's take a look at that Fiat deal. One of the things they said to Fiat is, "It you want another 5% stake in Chrysler, you're going to have to deliver a 40 mile per gallon engine in the United States."

Conaway : So the Obama administration is directly saying to Fiat that you can have some more of Chrysler, but you've gotta give us a car that does like this on the road?

Langfitt: Exactly. So you can say publicly, as the president has, we're not going to dictate policy, but you already have the White House saying, "If you want X, you're going to have to deliver Y," and Y is a very fuel efficient engine, which is what the government's policy is towards oil and part of its energy policy and part of its automotive policy. So, it's very hard to divide this up when you have a government that has other political agendas that are related to the car industry.

Conaway : And let's talk for a minute about those agendas because government comes with one set of goals - more fuel efficient cars, maintaining the employment rate or getting the unemployment rate down in places like Michigan and Ohio, nobody in those places want to see the auto industry go away. But a profit-making company like Chrysler comes at things from a very different set of goals. First and foremost has to be, by law, maximizing profit.

Langfitt: Absolutely.

Conaway : How do you reconcile those?

Langfitt: It's going to be fascinating. This is going to be one of the big meta-stories of what's happening with the auto industry because if you talk with people in Michigan, they say smile and just nod their heads when Obama says anything. They say, "Sure boss, we'll do whatever you want." But they say it's been very difficult traditionally for those companies to make much money on small cars. The profit margins are very narrow. People perceive, rightly, that Toyota and Honda are better at making them. And so they're concerned about these fairly significant fuel standards and that they're going to have to make small cars that they can't make money off of, which would run counter to the tax payers' interest, which is getting some kind of return on the money we've put into these companies. So in some ways, these things can be very much at odds and how it plays out is going to be fascinating.

The discussion continues. It is really great. I just can't be bothered transcribing any more of it. This section was the most interesting to me anyways.

This contradiction between profitable cars and cars that the Obama administration wants the companies to produce is incredible. I can see where Obama is coming from. It is in America's best interest to get away from its oil addiction and try to drive smaller cars. Yet it is hard to see how the companies that the US is now gobbling up are going to be able to sustain themselves on such cars.

There are no clear answers as to how the collapse of the US auto industry can or will be reconciled. What happens over the coming months and years is going to be remarkable to witness.

Climate Change Rhetoric

Talks before Copenhagen's Climate Change Conference later this year are continuing to heat up.

From The Wall St. Journal:

China, in a new document outlining its stance ahead of December climate talks in Copenhagen, says it wants developed nations to cut their greenhouse-gas emissions by at least 40% by 2020 from 1990 levels. But that is a far more aggressive cut than the level proposed in the U.S.'s Waxman-Markey bill. Europe, in turn, has pledged to cut emissions by at least 20% by 2020 from 1990 levels, and by 30% if other advanced economies follow suit.

The divergent views come as negotiations begin in earnest for a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, which expires at the end of 2012. China's 40% target represents the high end of cuts in emissions mentioned in the 2007 Bali road map, which stopped short of endorsing a specific target.

China is also asking rich countries to donate at least 0.5% to 1% of annual gross domestic product to help poorer countries cope with climate change and greenhouse-gas emissions, it said in the document, which was posted on the Web site of the National Development and Reform Commission, its economic policy-making body.

China has resisted any mandatory quotas on carbon emissions. The country is widely considered to have surpassed the U.S. as the world's top polluter.

Read On

So China is really playing the developing nation card here and calling upon richer nations to help out those not at a high-level of economic development yet though.

Somewhat surprisingly, China appears to be walking the walk and not simply talking the talk on this issue.

From The New York Times:

China's efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions are "impressive" and are often underestimated in the United States, President Obama's top climate change ambassador said yesterday.

U.S. climate envoy Todd Stern told E&E that when major economies meet in Paris on climate change next week, they will try to bridge the gap between ambitious domestic energy agendas in some emerging nations like China and the seemingly unyielding negotiating positions that developing countries take to the U.N. global warming talks.

"If you look at what a country like China is actually doing with respect to climate change, it's quite significant," Stern said. "It's quite impressive in many ways."

China and the United States are the world's biggest global warming polluters, accounting for 47 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. The 1997 Kyoto Protocol -- to which the United States is not a party -- requires only industrialized countries to make cuts. So far, neither America nor China has been willing to reduce emissions before the other.

Advocates for a new global climate treaty in Copenhagen this year say an agreement between China and the United States is critical. Chinese negotiators, meanwhile, have remained firm in insisting that industrialized countries act first and that developing nations not be forced to make legally binding commitments.

Still, Stern said he believes Americans often wrongly assume China is not acting on climate change at all.

"In fact, they have a 20 percent energy intensity goal, they've got a significant renewable energy goal, and they've got an auto standard that is about where our brand-new ones are," Stern said, referring to the Obama administration's proposed new fuel efficiency targets of 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016.

"It's clearly not enough," he said, but added, "they've got a lot of things going on."

Read On

I suppose there might some kind of politicking behind these comments, but the reason why Stern would give false praise to the Chinese isn't abundantly clear to me. Stern may very well just be stating what he really believes or is observing.

Combatting climate change and carbon emissions seems like a great economic opportunity in addition to being the responsible thing to do. It would not be surprising to me if China and the US were to embrace fighting climate change for economic reasons more than anything else.

Developing clean energy resources could be a great way to innovate one's country out of recession. Becoming less reliant on oil, its fluxuating prices, and the shady countries that provide much of it would also be a very noble and practical goal.

Whether the adoption of an agreement to reduce carbon emissions by China, the US, and the rest of the world happens because of attempts to cultivate new economic opportunities or because of genuine concern for the environment doesn't matter too much to me. As long as some kind of action is taken, that is enough for me.

Unholy Oil Alliances

In these tough economic times, China and Venezuela are stepping up their relationship.

From AFP:

CARACAS (AFP) — Venezuela and China agreed to boost economic relations Tuesday, as Vice President Xi Jinping began a two-day visit to the country and Beijing continued to expand its presence in Latin America.

Xi and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez agreed to establish a joint business committee to foster contacts between business leaders in both nations and increase ties in the service, trade and investment sectors.

"I ask you to unleash all your creativity to lead this business committee to a map full of achievements," Chavez told a meeting of Venezuelan and Chinese business leaders.

"We're sure that through our joint effort the mutually beneficial cooperation between China and Venezuela will know a brighter future," Xi said.

Read On

According to Hugo Chavez, Venezuela is prepared to "provide China with all the oil it needs for the next 200 years."

Hugo Chavez and the United States obviously do not have the best relationship. But seeing that Venezuela is the third largest foreign oil supplier to the United States with 1.5 million barrels of oil a day, the US doesn't really have much room to criticize China for its ties with the country.

But the other alliance China's strengthened this week is sure to make right-wing Americans' heads explode.

From The Associated Press:

SHANGHAI - Call it planning ahead.

While China's exports plunge and millions of laid-off workers hunt for jobs, the country's big state companies are spending billions of dollars securing access to oil and other scarce resources the country will need in coming decades.

The $25 billion energy agreement signed late Tuesday by China and Russia was the biggest of several deals signed this month, with state financial backing, that are expanding Beijing's overseas resources base at a time when most banks elsewhere are not lending and most governments are barely scraping by.

"Obviously, now, those are holding cash can speak louder than those who have resources," said Qiu Xiaofeng, an analyst at China Merchant Securities, in Shanghai.

"The global economic crisis has given China a rare, good opportunity to trade our abundant currency reserves for other countries' oil resources," Qiu said.

The long-awaited deal signed Tuesday provides a $25 billion loan to Russia in exchange for 15 million tons of oil annually (300,000 barrels per day) for 20 years. The China Development Bank will lend $15 billion to Russia's state-owned Rosneft oil company and $10 million to Transneft, its state pipeline monopoly.

Read On

China made strides this week towards securing its future energy needs. And when one also takes into consideration the oil arrangements that China has developed with Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran, China has obviously done a really good job in getting a disversified arrangement of oil suppliers.

Looking at the countries and considering the billions of dollars that are going to be thrown at them though, ending our addiction to oil has never sounded like a better idea. For as long as we are addicted to oil, countries that have little to no conception of human rights and who are responsible for horrible atrocities will continue to be propped up by oil exports.

While I've gone over the list of countries that China is strengthening ties to, I'm not so impressed with the pandering that the United States is forced to resort to to keep its energy supplies flush either. The US' alliances may not be quite as shady as China's but they are by no means saints when it comes to dealing with oil producing nations.

Unfortunately, I don't see much reason to be optimistic that China, the United States, or the rest of the world will be ending its addiction to oil, a natural resource sustaining many of the most underhanded nations in the world, any time soon.

Xi'an Goes Solar

Xi'an just opened the largest solar research facility in the world.

From Tradingmarkets.com:

XI'AN, Nov 11, 2008 (AsiaPulse via COMTEX) -- Applied Materials Inc. of the United States recently kicked off the construction of its global solar energy research and development (R&D) center in Xi'an, capital of Northwest China's Shaanxi Province.

Applied Materials will inject US$45 million into the R&D center, which is expected to come into operation in June 2009, covering 34,000 square meters of floor space.

After completion, the new center will be the world's first solar energy R&D center integrating thin-film and crystalline silicon solar energy technologies, and it is also one of the most advanced and largest ones globally.

Read On

Hopefully, this kind of research will help put an end to China's utter dependence on coal for its power.

Although China is reliant fossil fuels, in some ways, it is quite progressive when it comes to alternative energy sources.

There are a lot of solar panels on roofs around Xi'an. In fact, there is a store selling solar-powered water heaters a few stores down from the school I work at:


Photo taken by my friend Andy at the solar water heater store

While Xi'an is by no means a green city, it is at least showing signs of life at cleaning its atrociously gray skies.

Unsustainable Lifestyles

Chinese Premier, Wen Jiabao, got chippy at a climate change conference yesterday.

From Reuters:

BEIJING, Nov 7 (Reuters) - Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao said rich nations must abandon their "unsustainable lifestyle" to fight climate change and expand help to poor nations bearing the brunt of worsening droughts and rising sea levels.

Wen told the opening of a conference on Friday the financial crisis was no reason for rich nations to delay fighting global warming.

"As the global financial crisis spreads and worsens, and the world economy slows down apparently, the international community must not waver in its determination to tackle climate change," Xinhua news agency quoted him as saying.

The two-day meeting is to push China's call for rich nations to fund a huge infusion of greenhouse gas-cutting technology for developing countries. But foreign officials at the meeting raised doubts about Beijing's proposal, which could stoke contention over who pays and how much.

China is widely believed to be the biggest emitter of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas from industry, power plants and vehicles lifting global temperatures. But Wen threw the onus back on rich nations, with their much higher emissions per person and long history of polluting the air.

"Developed countries shoulder the duty and responsibility to tackle climate change and should alter their unsustainable lifestyle," he told the meeting.

Read On

I can see where Wen is coming on this. Seeing Chinese people live on much less than people back in America do (and still be happy) is enlightening. The "lords of more" that control Western society are forever taking their toll on our fragile planet.

The citizens of Wen's own country could listen to his advice too though. His comments don't only apply to Western countries. China's rich strive to live like Americans. Judging by the amount of foreign cars and new condos and houses I see every day around town, it looks like scores of Chinese people are in fact reaching their dreams.

Reading this article reminds me a lot of this article about how venture capitalism is making serious investments into "green" energy production.

I'm not sure how green technologies are going to be developed - whether through private or government investment - but the sooner they can be implemented the better as far as I'm concerned.