NewEnergyNews: CHINA CALLS FOR STOP TO EMISSIONS RENDITIONS

NewEnergyNews

Gleanings from the web and the world, condensed for convenience, illustrated for enlightenment, arranged for impact...

Every day is Earth Day.

YESTERDAY

  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-CLIMATE CHANGE AND THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-WHERE NEW ENERGY NEEDS TO BE
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-KUWAIT’S POSSIBLE SOLAR
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-WHAT INDIA WIND NEEDS
  • -------------------

    GET THE DAILY HEADLINES EMAIL: CLICK HERE TO SUBMIT YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS OR SEND YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS TO: herman@NewEnergyNews.net

    -------------------

    THE DAY BEFORE

  • TTTA Thursday- HOW CLIMATE CHANGE DENIAL WORKS
  • TTTA Thursday-HOW WOMEN MAKE A DIFFERENCE
  • TTTA Thursday-POLITICS AND THE EPA
  • TTTA Thursday-THE ENORMOUS LED OPPORTUNITY
  • THE DAY BEFORE THE DAY BEFORE

  • TODAY’S STUDY: THE NEW INTELLIGENT ENERGY EFFICIENCY
  • QUICK NEWS, May 15: MINNESOTA’S SOLAR AMBITIONS IN CONTEXT; RHODE ISLAND’S FIGHT OVER OCEAN WIND; VC MONEY FOR SMART GRID STEADY

    THE DAY BEFORE THAT

  • TODAY’S STUDY: HOW OIL MARKETS ARE MANIPULATED
  • QUICK NEWS, May 14: HUGE BUFFETT WIND BUY IN IOWA; THE VALUE OF ARIZONA’S SUN; MINNESOTA LOVES WIND
  • AND THE DAY BEFORE THAT

  • TODAY’S STUDY: THE VALUE OF SOLAR WITH STORAGE
  • QUICK NEWS, May 13: HOW BIG OIL USES REPUBLICANS; WIND SAVES MONEY FOR RATEPAYERS – STUDY; BRIGHTSOURCE EXEC TALKS SOLAR TOWER TECH & BIZ
  • THE LAST DAY UP HERE

  • Weekend Video: Senator Blasts Senator For Using Religion To Deny Climate Change
  • Weekend Video: The Remarkable Wind In Scotland
  • Weekend Video: The Sci Show Does Solar
  • --------------------------

    --------------------------

    Anne B. Butterfield of Daily Camera and Huffington Post, is a biweekly contributor to NewEnergyNews

  • Lies, damned lies and politicians (October 8, 2012) by Anne Butterfield (Boulder Daily Camera via NewEnergyNews)

    From the sparring at the first presidential debate, it's pretty sure that energy has become a divisive as well as a competitive issue. Both President Obama and Governor Romney want to be the triumphal producer of energy.

    However Romney likes to smear climate change concerns and clean energy investments, as if all of them go like Solyndra, where a half a billion in loan guarantees went down with the company, as he crowed that 50 percent of clean energy investments supported by the stimulus bill had gone belly up. This was dubbed the "lie of the night" by Michael Grunwald, author of a book about the stimulus bill, citing that maybe one percent of government backed clean energy ventures failed.

    Try getting that rate of safety in your investing. According to a new poll by Hart for the solar industry, voters seem to know that loan guarantees are a steadfast service of government and highly safe, as the Solyndra debacle was deemed unimportant by respondents. Ninety-two percent of registered voters found it important that solar be more widespread, with 70 percent believing that the federal government should be doing more to promote it with incentives (with 71 percent of swing voters feeling this way).

    And, sigh, with tens of thousands of wind power jobs on the chopping block already, Mitt Romney opposes the renewal of the Production Tax Credit. This, even as red states need it renewed, putting him in the dog house with GOP politicians such as Senator Chuck Grassely of Iowa whose state produces 20 percent of its power from wind, and Governor Brownback of Kansas who has made vigorous pleas for the extension of the credit, due to expire this at the end of this year.

    Didn't Romney get the memo? Republican governors are making hay with clean energy such as Haley Barbour and Chris Christie. To Mississippi, Barbour brought four solar sector firms to Mississippi along with two in biofuels plus a clean tech car venture with China. Christie made New Jersey a leading solar market in the nation, this year contending with California for first place.

    But Romney and other high priests of the GOP act as though the only real energy is the type that can be burned, and somehow, Obama has nibbled at this hemlock by constantly touting his success with fracking and his openness to the XL pipeline.

    A truly strange specter is that pipeline; it lets our heartland be used as a byway for tar sands products (which sink rather than float when spilled), so they can go straight to international markets. We get the downsides and none of the upsides -- even as the pipeline could increase gasoline prices in the Midwest, which would lose its existing access to tar sands products.

    One plausible upside of the pipeline being routed through the United States (where it might be built quickly, as would not happen in the alternative route through western Canada) is that it could strengthen the hand of President Obama in his suite of sanctions against Iran, including a worldwide boycott of Iranian oil. Our recent frack-mania allows our nation to resume oil production levels not seen for 15 years and thus strengthens our hand. Three weeks ago Iran admitted having problems selling oil due to U.S. and European sanctions; now the nation's currency is in free fall.

    One certainly hopes that tar sands will thrive mightily as a "psy-ops" against Iran and not as a chemical weapon against our climate, as Dr. James Hansen has sternly warned.

    Never bounded by his prior convictions about the climate, Romney crows that he would authorize the pipeline on day one and build it himself if need be (as if he in his wingtips could "John Wayne" his way around an oil field). It's all such a sham he-man rodeo.

    And no one mentioned the climate -- in spite of hundreds of thousands of petition signatures demanding the topic. Neither candidate pushed clean energy as the vote winner that poll after poll have shown it to be. Authors for DBL Investors in their study of green energy exclaim, "We all need to understand that green jobs are not the idle dreaming of a small group of partisan activists and insiders, but a source of livelihood for millions, literally in all parts of the country." The light shines in the darkness but the darkness of our politics has not understood it.

    Author's note: Want to support my work? Please "fan" me at Huffpost Denver, here (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anne-butterfield). Thanks.

    -------------------

    Anne's previous NewEnergyNews columns:

  • Lies, damned lies and politicians (October 8, 2012)
  • Colorado's Elegant Solution to Fracking (April 23, 2012)
  • Shale Gas: From Geologic Bubble to Economic Bubble (March 15, 2012)
  • Taken for granted no more (February 5, 2012)
  • The Republican clown car circus (January 6, 2012)
  • Twenty-Somethings of Colorado With Skin in the Game (November 22, 2011)
  • Occupy, Xcel, and the Mother of All Cliffs (October 31, 2011)
  • Boulder Can Own Its Power With Distributed Generation (June 7, 2011)
  • The Plunging Cost of Renewables and Boulder's Energy Future (April 19, 2011)
  • Paddling Down the River Denial (January 12, 2011)
  • The Fox (News) That Jumped the Shark (December 16, 2010)
  • Click here for an archive of Butterfield columns

    -------------------

    Some details about NewEnergyNews and the man behind the curtain: Herman K. Trabish, Agua Dulce, CA., Doctor with my hands, Writer with my head, Student of New Energy and Human Experience with my heart

    email: herman@NewEnergyNews.net

    -------------------

    Your intrepid reporter

    -------------------

      A tip of the NewEnergyNews cap to Phillip Garcia for crucial assistance in the design implementation of this site. Thanks, Phillip.

    -------------------

    Pay a visit to the HARRY BOYKOFF page at Basketball Reference, sponsored by NewEnergyNews and Oil In Their Blood.

  • ---------------
  • Sunday, March 22, 2009

    CHINA CALLS FOR STOP TO EMISSIONS RENDITIONS

    China seeks export carbon relief
    17 March 2009 (BBC News)
    and
    US should consider duties on polluting nations-Chu
    Ayesha Rascoe (w/Jim Marshall), 17 March 2009 (Thomson Reuters)
    and
    China minister rejects U.S. carbon tariff idea
    Paul Eckert (w/Cynthia Osterman) March 18, 2009 (Reuters)

    SUMMARY
    Li Gao, China’s lead climate change negotiator, proposed that importers of goods, not the manufacturers, be held accountable for the emissions generated in the export goods' production.

    China, the world’s biggest emitter, generates 15-to-25% of its greenhouse gases (GhGs) making goods for export to the develped world. If emerging economies did not do this emissions-intensive manufacturing, the nations where the goods are consumed would either suffer the burdens of the GhGs or be forced to change their habits.

    If the coming global emissions-reduction plan holds China solely responsible for GhGs emitted in the manufacturing of goods consumed in other nations, it will likely drive China's power prices up and render a blow to China's economy. China (and other emerging economies such as India and Indonesia) will refuse to participate in such a plan, rendering it impotent against global climate change.

    click to enlarge

    Li announced China's position at a meeting with U.S., EU and Japanese climate change negotiators hosted by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change in Washington, D.C. They met to prepare for the December Copenhagen world summit at which a new world agreement on global action to fight climate change will be finalized.

    It is hoped the Copenhagen treaty will, unlike the expiring Kyoto Protocol it will replace, include the U.S. and China in active roles in the emissions reduction effort.

    China suggested its exports be exempted from any agreement reached in Copenhagen.

    U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu’s suggestion was to use a tariff to goods imported from China and other emerging economies that would account for the cost of the emissions generated in their manufacture. He said this would keep U.S. goods competitive with those made at a lower cost that did not account for emissions.

    Li called Chu’s proposal protectionist and rejected it, saying the U.S. needs to focus on its own emissions rather than China’s.

    Chu said he hopes nations like China and India, whose emissions are growing much faster than those of the U.S., will be able to participate in the world’s effort to reverse global climate change.

    Rendition is the practice getting somebody else - like China - to do the dirty work. (click to enlarge)

    COMMENTARY
    - China enters the climate change debate with a slight moral advantage over the U.S. because it participated in the Kyoto agreement, though with a developing economy exemption allowing it to ignore emissions reductions. The U.S. is one of the few nations in the world that did not participate in the Kyoto agreement.
    - China’s suggestion reflects its attitude that it should not be limited in its economic development by climate change considerations.
    - Chu’s suggestion reflects his commitment to the market-based GhG-reduction program incorporated in the EU’s cap&trade system and expected to be part of the climate change legislation pushed by the Obama administration.
    - The U.S. cap&trade legislation is expected to put a cost burden on emitters that will generate federal revenues with which (1) New Energy and Energy Efficiency programs and infrastructure can be built and (2) the burden of higher short-term power prices can be offset for taxpayers.
    - Pointing out that the GhGs now in the atmosphere and causing global climate change were generated as economically developed nations amassed wealth and power, China has repeatedly stressed that its reluctance to participate in the global effort against climate change is because it wants the opportunity to likewise develop its own economy and amass its own wealth.

    click to enlarge

    - Representatives of developed economies that import inexpensive Chinese goods believe it would be extremely challenging logistically to enact China’s suggestion of applying the GhG burden of China’s exports in consuming nations.
    - The bookkeeping logistics of applying emissions costs to imported Chinese goods would, it should be pointe out, likely be more convenient than dealing with the worst impacts of global climate change.
    - Secretary Chu’s proposal (made at a hearing of the House Science and Technology Committee and not in direct negotiation with the Chinese representative) makes it clear that the point of an international agreement is to put a price on emissions to discourage consumption of goods whose manufacture is GhG-intensive.
    - The 2 questions: Would tracking Chinese imported goods and applying a price burden on consumers exert economic leverage to reduce Chinese emissions? Does China want to give up control of that economic activity?
    - A Chinese expert has suggested the issue of import tariffs and the issue of emissions be worked out separately. This is exactly counter to Secretary Chu’s argument that they are inextricably intertwined.

    click to enlarge

    QUOTES
    - Li Gao, lead climate change negotiator/director of the Department of Climate Change, China: "About 15 percent to 25 percent of China's emissions come from the products which we make for the world…These products are consumed by other countries... This share of emissions should be taken by the consumers but not the producers …”
    - Li, on the parameters of the Copenhagen agreement: "It is a very important item to make a fair agreement…We are at the low end of the production line for the global economy…We produce products and these products are consumed by other countries, especially the developed countries. This share of emissions should be taken by the consumers but not the producers…"

    China's New Energy ambitions are admirable... (click to enlarge)

    - Li, on the proposed U.S. tariff on goods imported from nations that have no restrictions on emissions: "If developed countries set a barrier in the name of climate change for trade, I think it is a disaster…"
    - Artur Runge-Metzger, climate change negotiator, EU, on the Chinese proposal: "[It] would mean that we would also… have jurisdiction and legislative powers in order to control and limit [China’s emissions]…I'm not sure whether my Chinese colleague would agree on that particular point…I think the issue here is we take full responsibility and we... regulate all the emissions that come from our territory…"
    - Shinsuke Sugiyama, chief negotiator, Japan: "Japan will not repeat Kyoto…At Kyoto we were not able to involve the biggest emitters in the world by now - and that means the United States of America and China…"
    - Steven Chu, U.S. Secretary of Energy: "If country X doesn't do this then I think we should look at considering perhaps duties that would offset that cost…"

    ...But something has to be done about the coal. (click to enlarge)

    - Xie Zhenhua, Climate Change and Coordinating Committee head, China: "Climate change and charging carbon taxes in imports ... are two issues in two areas…I oppose using climate change as an excuse to practice protectionism on trade…"
    - Xie Zhenhua, Climate Change and Coordinating Committee head, China: "China is not a country that does nothing…On the contrary we have done a lot…The United States is in the same boat. They just talk about it but there are no actions, and we don't even know whether Congress will pass it…"

    0 Comments:

    Post a Comment

    << Home