Daekar
Enlightened
First of all, please try to keep this from being a China-bashing thread, there seem to be enough of those... I just wanted to share an article I got from Wired News and get some opinions on whether or not people agree with the logic employed by the Chinese Vice Foreign Minister. I've copied the article text, the original can be found here unless Wired moves/removes it.
China Signals Rejection of Emission Caps
By JOE McDONALD
Associated Press Writer
BEIJING (AP) -- A Chinese official gave the clearest sign yet that Beijing will reject binding caps on greenhouse gas emissions .............
© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.
My knee-jerk response is to call BS - if you're going to regulate pollution it should be regulated per capita. China is big, but it's not over half of the world population - in fact, based on figures from here and here, the estimated population of China is 1,321,851,888 and the estimated world population is 6,602,224,175, which yields a percentage of just over 20%. Therefore if the 58% figure given at the end is correct (which might be up for debate, seeing as the UN report on the effect of cattle on global warming was filled with bad data and conclusions) then they are overstepping what is a "fair" amount of emissions.
Before somebody points out that the USA also oversteps what are a "fair" amount of emissions, please remember: I never claimed we didn't, and if we do emit more than our per-capita share then the situation should be amended as it should be anywhere else. Also, please remember that such an argument does nothing to influence the data presented, their validity, or any unbiased conclusion based on them. For the purpose of comparison, let us remember that the population of the USA (found here) is 301,139,947, a paltry 4.56% of the world population, and that China is only now, when they have 4 times the population, preparing to surpass us in greenhouse-gas emissions.
Edit: Copyrighted text removed as violation of copyright and CPF rules.
Thread closed as more suitable for Underground discussion. - Empath
China Signals Rejection of Emission Caps
By JOE McDONALD
Associated Press Writer
BEIJING (AP) -- A Chinese official gave the clearest sign yet that Beijing will reject binding caps on greenhouse gas emissions .............
© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.
My knee-jerk response is to call BS - if you're going to regulate pollution it should be regulated per capita. China is big, but it's not over half of the world population - in fact, based on figures from here and here, the estimated population of China is 1,321,851,888 and the estimated world population is 6,602,224,175, which yields a percentage of just over 20%. Therefore if the 58% figure given at the end is correct (which might be up for debate, seeing as the UN report on the effect of cattle on global warming was filled with bad data and conclusions) then they are overstepping what is a "fair" amount of emissions.
Before somebody points out that the USA also oversteps what are a "fair" amount of emissions, please remember: I never claimed we didn't, and if we do emit more than our per-capita share then the situation should be amended as it should be anywhere else. Also, please remember that such an argument does nothing to influence the data presented, their validity, or any unbiased conclusion based on them. For the purpose of comparison, let us remember that the population of the USA (found here) is 301,139,947, a paltry 4.56% of the world population, and that China is only now, when they have 4 times the population, preparing to surpass us in greenhouse-gas emissions.
Edit: Copyrighted text removed as violation of copyright and CPF rules.
Thread closed as more suitable for Underground discussion. - Empath
Last edited by a moderator:
