EMISSIONS RENDITION

It is clear how long greenhouse gas emissions (GhGs) now in earth’s “carbon cycle” have been there: About 3,000 years.

The significance? It is clear the increased concentration of GhGs producing the intensified “greenhouse effect” responsible for global cliamte change began at the beginning of the industrial revolution.

Conclusion: It is clear that blaming what the Chinese do in the 21st century for global climate change misses the point.

What is going on now, the enormous increase of China's GhGs, is a case of “emissions rendition” in which developed nations send their dirty work to China so they can claim they are no longer responsible for the damage it does.

The contribution of Chinese exports to climate change, a study from researchers at Carnegie Mellon University, finds that 1/3 of the world-leading GhGs generated by China are in service to manufacturing goods for export to developed nations.

It raises a question: Who bears the “blame” for the worsening of global climate change caused by the manufacture of these goods, the consumers who create the demand or makers who provide the supply?

Benito Müller, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies: "It's just like narcotics…Who is responsible, the drug baron or the junkies?"

Why is it important to ascribe "blame?"

From the Carnegie Mellon study: “Climate policies which would make the developed world responsible for China's export emissions have both benefits and costs, and must be carefully designed to achieve political consensus and equity. Whoever is responsible for these emissions, China's rapidly expanding infrastructure and inefficient coal-powered electricity system need urgent attention.”

Today’s best policy tools for attacking climate change are the “carbon tax” and “cap-and-trade.” Both penalize GhG emitters. What if the burden was shifted to consumers?

Consider: Would a consumer be more prudent about burning electric light or running air conditioning if a premium was directly assessed for GhGs emitted? Think how quickly oil consumption has fallen as gas pump prices have risen.

Consider: Higher retail prices on shelf goods due to surcharges for GhGs generated in the manufacturing process would certainly impinge on sales. Is there a better way to drive manufacturers to low-emissions production methods?

It is therefore worth thinking about "blame," about where emissions come from, if it offers insights into how better to mitigate their generation.

From the “things change before our very eyes” file: Even as western nations’ leaders condemn rising Chinese GhGs, China has moved (as shown by the new report) from being a primary to a secondary producer, now generating more emissions from exports of manufactured goods than from exports of raw materials. In other words, China is evolving. How long ‘til it becomes post-industrial and starts wagging its finger at some newly emerging economy?

A Tyndall Centre study from 2007 came to similar conclusions. (click to enlarge)

33% of China’s carbon footprint blamed on exports
Catherine Brahic, 28 July 2008 (New Scientist)

WHO
China; Carnegie Mellon University (Christopher Weber, Glen Peters, Dabo Guan & Klaus Hubacek, study authors)

WHAT
The contribution of Chinese exports to climate change finds that 1/3 of China’s world-leading GhGs are "export goods emissions," generated in the production of goods for developed nations.

For China, it's about meeting the demands of growth. (click to enlarge)

WHEN
- China’s GhGs have doubled in the last 5 years.
- 1987: Manufacture for export in China generated 12% of its GhGs.
- 2002: Manufacture for export in China generated 21% of its GhGs.
- 2005: Manufacture for export in China generated 33% of its GhGs.

WHERE
China’s "export goods emissions" are greater than German, French and UK total combined emissions.

WHY
- "Export goods emissions" are GhGs generated in service to manufacturing goods for export.
- Chinese "export goods emissions" = 1.7 billion tonnes, 33% of total Chinese GhGs, 6% of world emissions. (1987 figure: 230 million tonnes, 12% of total emissions)
- The C-M study used a Chinese government model of the China economy. It used the standard parameters employed by all national government economic models.
- Emissions data, not yet available beyond 2005, also came from the Chinese government.

Maybe if the U.S. did a little better, China would, too. (click to enlarge)

QUOTES
- Benito Müller, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies: "In some measure, it makes sense if people buy goods and become liable for the emissions generated when the goods are produced…They will certainly be more choosy about what they buy."
- Christopher Weber, C-M University Professor & Researcher/study co-author, on apportion liability for harm done by export goods emissions: “…the million-dollar question…”