Since nobody can track twigs and cowpats, Chinas carbon accountants can make its renewable numbers come out anywhere they like.
China is the largest emitter of greenhouse gas on the planet. We burn more carbon per person, but China has more people, and both its population and economy are growing much faster than ours. For many members of Congress, a vote for strict carbon limits will be politically suicidal if constituents continue to believe--correctly--that the vote will propel a massive shift of jobs, wealth and emissions from Peoria to Beijing. So in the coming months watch out for brazenly false claims that China is blazing the green trail, and getting richer by doing so, and that to compete we must outgreen them. China is of course delighted to jigger numbers to help frame the story.
“China attaches great importance to tackling climate change,” Chinas climate commissar recently declared. The Middle Kingdom therefore promises to lower its energy consumption per unit of GDP. Translation: “We promise to get richer.” Energy consumption per unit of GDP always falls as a country gets richer. The poorest countries in Africa spend 100% of their GDP on food, the most primitive form of energy. Bill Gates, on the other hand, has the lowest energy consumption per unit of household GDP on the planet. Carbon emissions per unit of GDP follow the same trajectory. Chinas are about twice as high as ours, Africas three times as high. The global climate, however, doesnt care a fig about hyphenated emissions, whether per capita, per dollar or per unit of sly political prevarication.
“China also sets an objective of increasing the proportion of renewable energy in the primary energy mix to 10% by 2010, and to 15% by 2020.” Translation: “Well keep on burning the stuff that poor people burn until we get rich.” Biomass accounts for 10% of the global energy supply but less than 4% in the developed world and closer to 2% in the U.S. The poor always burn more carbohydrates, fewer hydrocarbons. Calling something “renewable” doesnt mean that it saves carbon. Agriculture, forestry and deforestation already cost the planet more than twice as much in carbon equivalents as transportation--over 30% of all emissions. Since nobody can track how many twigs, cowpats and rice husks a billion peasants burn--or alternatively, leave to fungi to convert into methane, a powerful greenhouse gas--Chinas carbon accountants can make its renewable numbers come out anywhere they like.
China is proud to report that it has been shutting down “small thermal power-generation units.” Translation: “Were replacing diesel generators with big coal-fired power plants.” Big, central power plants burn much cheaper fuel much more efficiently, and therefore generate much cheaper power, and therefore boost energy consumption, emissions and GDP even faster.
China touts its new wind, hydroelectric and nuclear capacity. Translation: “Chinas energy policy is--and will remain--solidly anchored in coal.” The word “capacity” next to “wind” misleads by a factor of five or so, because much of the time the wind doesnt blow. Chinas nuclear plants and its gargantuan hydroelectric dams will indeed make a real dent in the carbon intensity of its energy supply. But mushrooming coal consumption will utterly swamp the savings for as long as anyone can possibly foresee.
China says it “has increased its carbon sinks by promoting reforestation.” Translation: “Your sinks dont count.” North America has been reforesting since 1920, and continues to do so. So fast, in fact, that were currently sucking about two-thirds of our carbon emissions back into our forests and soil. Europe and Japan hate all such talk, at least when its America thats talking, because we have lots of land to reforest and they dont. U.S. greens do their best not to talk about it too, because--well, it gets in the way of other agendas.
China says because its poor and were rich, we must slash our emissions--absolute emissions, not the per-GDP kind--by 25% to 40% in the next decade, and also pay China and other developing countries in both cash and technology transfers to help them curb theirs. Translation: “Youre responsible for our sorry past.”
Agricultural footprints shrink, forests recover and birth rates decline as people get richer. Our 19th-century birth rates were as high as Chinas and Indias were through most of the 20th. Their huge, impoverished populations reflect economic and political choices that stifled economic growth in their countries during the century when we got rich, stabilized our populations, reforested our land and dispatched would-be global tyrants to the dustbin of history. China, not America, is responsible for the economic and demographic legacies of Puyi, Yuan, Sun, Chiang and Mao.
Original Source: http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2009/1102/opinions-china-carbon-greenhouse-gas-insights.html