China

SCMP – 5th March 2009

Artificial rainfall should become a routine practice in some drought-affected areas of the country, says NPC delegate Zong Qinghou. He said some areas in the north and northwest had endured many droughts, and occasional use of artificial rainfall could only ease that pressure. He said the rain-making efforts would not change the environment and would improve the quality of people’s lives. He proposed that the nation’s weather watchers create a team dedicated to inducing rain regularly, Chinanews.com.cn reports.

Boosting economy takes priority over calculating cost to the environment

Shi Jiangtao in Beijing – Updated on Mar 04, 2009 – SCMP

Beijing has stopped calculating the pollution cost of its economic growth as it goes all out to lift the economy, a top environmental official says.

The controversial “green GDP” project, which deducts the economic consequences of environmental damage from the original gross domestic product figures, has been put on hold since early 2007 because of resistance from local officials.

The move came as top leaders repeatedly pledged that an aggressive 4 trillion yuan (HK$4.5 trillion) stimulus package announced late last year would not take a toll on the battered environment.

Analysts said it was a major retrogression for Beijing’s ambitious campaign to cut energy use and pollution, which came after the government promised to combat climate change together with Washington during US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s recent visit.

Environmental vice-minister Pan Yue said on the sidelines of the opening session of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference that “the green GDP project has been cancelled” and “will not be resumed [any time soon]”.

The project, aimed at providing a true picture of the mainland’s degradation by putting an environmental price tag on economic success, has been shrouded in controversy since its introduction in 2004.

It has been widely applauded by the public along with Beijing’s pledges to slash energy consumption by 20 per cent and curb pollution emissions by 10 per cent by the end of next year – but development-minded local authorities have scorned it.

An incomplete calculation of the environmental costs in 2004 showed that pollution caused more than 510 billion yuan in economic losses, or 3 per cent of GDP, according to the only green GDP report ever published, in 2006.

Mainland leaders who had lent their support from the outset of the research scheme were apparently embarrassed by the huge environmental price of the runaway economic development and decided to postpone the release of a second report.

President Hu Jintao shelved the green GDP calculations indefinitely ahead of the Communist Party’s congress in 2007, in an attempt to ensure a successful political reshuffle.

Despite widespread appeals to reinstate the project, analysts said environmentalism had been sidelined again amid the economic slowdown.

Many conservationists have expressed fears about the green impact of the stimulus package, with much of the spending focusing on energy-intensive and polluting industries. Mr Hu and Premier Wen Jiabao had promised several times since December that the mainland would not make the same mistakes of “pollution first and cleanup later”, which contributed to the economic miracle of the past three decades.

However, sources at the Ministry of Environmental Protection said energy and infrastructure projects totalling 800 billion yuan had been approved by the ministry in the past three months.

The ministry had been told not to hamper economic growth, they said.

Analysts said the cancellation of the green GDP project and the ministry’s relatively rapid approval process in recent months were a result of intense political pressure from the top leadership.

“There is a clear conflict between lifting the economy and upholding strict environmental standards,” a Beijing-based environmentalist said. “It is not surprising to see such a result, given the country’s poor environmental record.”

Although Beijing had announced progress in cutting key pollutants, Mr Pan said there was still a long way to go to reverse the worsening environmental degradation.

Shi Jiangtao in Beijing, SCMP – Updated on Feb 20, 2009

As US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton arrives in Beijing today, the global media will watch closely to see if Washington’s new-found interest in climate change will result in closer ties between the world’s two biggest emitters of greenhouse gases.

There has been much talk in the US about setting aside differences over global warming responsibilities and working together towards a solution ahead of a key December climate meeting in Copenhagen, Denmark.

Climate change, one of the most talked about but least acted upon world issues, is expected to be high on Mrs Clinton’s agenda during her first official trip as secretary of state.

It is even described by US officials as a new focal point in Sino-US ties, which have often been marked by political and economic rifts.

China has responded with a cautious welcome, calling on the US and other developed countries to “take the lead in cutting emissions, and providing funds and technical help”.

Despite positive, yet vague diplomatic rhetoric, mainland experts said neither side had offered much to end the impasse in the international climate talks and ignite change.

Renmin University professor Zou Ji said Mrs Clinton’s visit was just the first step towards further communication, and the Beijing talks were unlikely to yield a substantial outcome.

“It will prepare the way for the G20 summit in London in early April, which will see the first meeting between President Hu Jintao and [US President Barack] Obama,” Professor Zou said.

He said recent academic reports in the US suggested closer co-operation between the world’s two biggest polluters but failed to present concrete measures.

“Compared with the much more sophisticated economic co-operation such as the strategic economic dialogue mechanism between the two countries, climate co-operation has just begun,” he said.

Tsinghua University climate expert Liu Bin said the recent US remarks reflected the new American administration’s diplomatic strategy of playing the climate card to put China at a disadvantage ahead of the Copenhagen talks.

“Mounting international pressure has already pushed the US to the brink of accepting its responsibility for climate change, which is long overdue. It wants to use China as a scapegoat,” Ms Liu said.

The US has been fiercely criticised for its refusal to ratify the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which subjected industrialised countries to mandatory carbon emissions caps and was supposed to help developing countries adapt to rising temperatures.

Washington has long argued that the existing climate pact, which exempted large developing countries such as China, Brazil and India from emission reduction targets, was unfair and harmful to its economy.

Representatives from nearly 200 countries will meet in the Danish capital to agree on a successor climate treaty to Kyoto, which expires in 2012.

However, talks in recent years have reached a stalemate, with developed and developing countries wrangling over key issues such as carbon targets, technology transfer and funding for adaptation in poor countries.

Lin Erda, a veteran expert from the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences said developed countries should take much of the blame for the “we will only take on commitments if they do” stalemate.

Although developed countries are obliged to provide finance and technology to developing countries under the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, a parent pact of Kyoto, little funding has been made available and hardly any technology has been transferred.

Experts agreed that funding shortages, which have plagued international co-operation for years and have been exacerbated by the unfolding financial crisis, would further delay bilateral collaboration.

“The previous US administrations, including those of George W. Bush and his predecessor Bill Clinton, offered little funding support for the international effort to address climate change. I don’t see any possibility for a turnaround in US policy in the near future given the current economic situation in the US,” Ms Liu said.

The deadlock on technology transfer also proved difficult to break.

Ms Liu said developed countries and businesses were more concerned about losing their competitive edge than the disastrous effects of global warming.

“There has been much talk about the China threat. Why would industrialised countries be willing to offer China the latest climate-friendly technologies?” she said.

Ms Liu said the US and China were more likely to join hands in fields such as research on clean coal and renewable energy, and the development of electric cars.

Mainland experts said the extent of each country’s commitment to tackling climate change should be decided by the level of economic development, and should not lower the living standards of ordinary citizens.

Although China was rumoured to have overtaken the US as the world’s top carbon emitter, it was developed countries, including the US, that had contributed the most to global warming historically, Professor Lin said.

“The stalemate in fund-raising and technology transfer has already prompted questions about whether developed countries intended to contain China and other developing countries,” he said.

His views were supported by other mainland experts, who pointed out that per capita carbon emissions for China’s 1.3 billion people were a fraction of that of rich countries.

Professor Zou said China did not have much room for compromise in Copenhagen. “China will eventually accept the limits, but it is definitely not now or in 10 years. I think it will probably happen in 20 years when China’s urbanisation is basically complete and most people lead decent lives in their houses with water and power supplies,” he said.

Jin Canrong, a Renmin University Sino-US affairs specialist, said Washington’s new-found willingness to address climate issues was largely a result of pledges Mr Obama made during his election campaign.

Although both sides expressed intentions to improve co-operation, Professor Jin agreed that it was difficult to see how far the two countries were willing to go.

But he agreed that compared with a host of sensitive political, economic and financial issues, climate change was a good choice for both countries to foster closer ties.