Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Fear Impact of Asian Pollutants On US
During the Olympics we discussed the international monitoring effort as China shut down factories and curtailed automobile travel in an attempt to reduce pollution. Now reader Anti-Globalism sends in a story that reveals that monitoring effort to be ongoing, with a bigger mandate: assessing the impact of China's pollution on the US. In fact the problem is bigger still because, as one researcher put it, "It's one atmosphere." Scientists are finding that pollution from, for example, Europe can travel right around the globe in three weeks. "By some estimates more than 10 billion pounds of airborne pollutants from Asia — ranging from soot to mercury to carbon dioxide to ozone — reach the US annually. The problem is only expected to worsen: Some Chinese officials have warned that pollution in their country could quadruple in the next 15 years. While some scientists are less certain, others say the Asian pollution could destabilize weather patterns across the North Pacific, mask the effects of global warming, reduce rainfall in the American West and compromise efforts to meet air-pollution standards."
Asian pollutants come to the US without a penny in their pocket. Within a year, they usually have a thriving business.
Their exports are pretty skunky, too. Would you care for some lead paint with your toy, junior?
Oh, but there I go being all liberal and gay and shit. Really, we should let the free markets decide what an acceptable level of poisoning should be for our children. "But they're using asbestos as a padding for the cushion in this crib!" The free market decided it was cheaper than foam. I'm sorry, but the market's decision is final, you'll just have to accept that.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Way to go ethnocentric! From the summary it sounds as if the USA is us. To all you people in Canada and Europe, congrats you've all been "promoted" to "them". Yeah thats right its us VS them commes!
... the solution is simple. Just forbid imports from polluting Chinese factories.
The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
America only pumps pure clean oxygen into the atmosphere.
Deleted
kettle.
For years US states have fought over which way the wind blows and as China ramps up *of course* its going to effect everyone down wind. What I found amusing is how they are saying a quadrupling of Chinese pollution (including co2) will 'mask' global warming?
How, exactly, does on mask global warming? by making it cooler? umm thats global cooling, ...
So were set:
If its gets warmer its because of co2, if its gets cooler its because of co2.... that about covers everything..
"Ahh! Arrogance and stupidity in the same package, how efficient of you!" --Londo Molari
Our handsomest politicians will come up with a half assed last minute solution!
Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
Gotta love the unwitting parochialism in this story- Those polluty old Asians are making all out cheap stuff!
This is our pollution. If you outsource industry, you outsource the concomitant waste. So do we wash our hands (in increasingly filthy water), or step up to the plate and deal? (A rhetorical question, I know....)
"Be light, stinging, insolent and melancholy"
Nuke 'em for orbit. It's the only way to be sure!
isn't a large part of China's pollution generated anyway by the U.S. (and other Western countries) that outsourced most of their factories. It seems a bit strange to complain about that IMHO
It's not just China's pollution. It's the world's pollution. We consume the product, and we should be responsible for the process waste.
Some portion of the purchase price should be allocated to r&d for minimising process waste. Whether taxed by manufacturers directly, or by participating governments.
Isn't the US still number one polluter or did China overtake recently? Either way the per capita pollution is still worse in the states by a hefty margin. Talk about being hypocritical.
Or there's no pollution in the US, never has been. The rest of the world has nothing to worry about from US manufacturing or transport. The greenhouse gases in the atmosphere now are someone else's fault; probably the French till the Chinese came along.
Is an administration that has some intestinal fortitude, that will NOT sell out to private interests, and start making demands to curb such behavior in order to be a part of our economy, a partner.
It is as simple as saying "Look. We do not appreciate your pollutants effecting us in the manner they currently are, and as such, we will curtail our trade with you until something is done.".
It is our right to do so. The only thing that stops us is corruption and spinelessness. Both curable maladies.
You've mentioned the effects of China and Europe on poor innocent America. Now, who's monitoring the effects of the USA's pollution? You know, that one developed country that still hasn't ratified the Kyoto Protocol.
Acknowledging and investigating the global effects of local pollution is a worthy endeavour, just as long as it's done in a balanced and open manner. We don't need yet another of the US's "Do as we say not as we do" hypocritical standpoints.
Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
If the US wants another country to cut their pollution, then it has to deal with its own.
It has refused to sign up to a commitment to reduce its own pollution, yet would like others to do so.
Ok, the US may not be the worst offender, but still 'do as I say not as I do' is hardly a philosophy fit for the world stage.
A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
partisans on the left, partisans on the right, nationalists of every nationality...
please shut the fuck up
the earth is our planet, and we must steward it
this applies to you on the left: a hands off attitude to mother gaia is complete bullshit in a world of 6 billion technologically inclined homo sapiens
this applies to you on the right: yes, human activity actually has an impact on our planet's climate, and yes, we must do something about it. we are sorry you are in denial on this subject. please learn to adapt to reality
furthermore, it does not matter who fucked up our environment, it simply matters that we must manage it, all of us. talking about blame is simply a desire to avoid responsibility. we all have the responsibility for our planet
we must must find ways to turn up the thermostat, we must find ways to turn down the thermostat, and then, we must actively do this. we have plenty of time to adjust and anticipate and counteradjust our manipulations. the scaremongers wish to talk about run away processes, but we are very much in the middle of a fluid and forgiving climate model. no atmosphere would have survived this long on earth were it so fragile and susceptile to runaway change. millenia of abuse from volcanoes and sun cycles and life processes has proven our atmosphere to be quite rugged
but not invulnerable, and certainly totally indifferent to our well-being and our need to grow crops. the earth has no problem turning into tundra or desert. but we have a problem with that. so let us actively manage the atmosphere to stay within comfortable parameters. this is of course completely artificial. the natural evolution OR human-made greenhouse gases migth dictate that the atmosphere go to a hellish extreme at some point. who cares WHY it might drift to an uncomfortable fringe state, natural or man-made, are we to simply sit back and suffer and wait for things to get comfortable again in a couple of thousand years?
no. we are mankind. unlike other animals, we do not adapt to our environment. we wear clothes, build huts: we adapt our environment to us. in this way, we conquer the taiga, and conquer the sahara. therefore, we must begin to actively engineer and manage our atmosphere to our liking, to homo sapiens comfort level. which is, pretty much as the climate is right now globally. freeze the status quo for all eternity
who CARES who is to blame, if anyone. active management is simply what we must begin to do. obviously, this should be a world body, something attached to the un. meanwhile, if we simply sit around passing the buck, blaming something else, nothing gets done, and we all go to hell. literally, in the case of climate change
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
first they say pollution is bad and causes global warming. now they're saying it masks global warming? really? how can it do both at the same time? i'm getting tired of the double-speak
The eastern part of canada receives pollution from the United states. So before you start crying about how others can make your place more horrible, please consider that you too are making a part of the world less habitable. Not everyone likes acid rain you know?
http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/usca/index.htm
more than 10 billion pounds of airborne pollutants from Asia
While this certainly is not a good thing for the environment, I wonder how this compares to pollution coming from the United States. According to wikipedia the US produced the most CO2 of any country in 2006. China might top the list this year, but I'm sure the US isn't far behind. I guess my point is that it seems hypocritical to criticize China for sending pollution to us when we've been doing it to the rest of the world for a long time. We should be leading by example and cleaning up our own industries first instead of trying to place blame.
I almost puked after reading this biased Slashdot article. The US and the Western world have been raping your own environment, and your colonies since the Industrial Revolution and you are now still reaping the benefits of this, channelled into political and military bullying. Who are you to tell "Asians" how to take care of the planet? I smell a political agenda to this so-called finding. The US is scared of an industrialised China and is not above playing dirty to stop it.
Or, alternatively, you could understand that different pollutants do different things. Just throwing that out there, you know. Sorta like CO2 absorbing EM waves in the IR band, and particles reflecting light back into space. Not that anyone would know anything about this.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
Stuff like this has always been happening... Pollution from one country going into another. Just think of a large river, like the Danube, which goes through 5 or 6 countries, each of which used to dump a lot of trash in it. There's nothing that the downstream countries could do about it.
The US is guilty of stuff like this as well. The Colorado river had a huge delta in northern Mexico. After the dam was built, the area where the Delta was is now a desert. What could the Mexicans do about it? Nothing.
It's ok the US an UK will declare war on them soon enough for it.
i'm more worried about the impact of faggots on our society. they carry diseases and this raises medical costs. there is no reason to defend faggots. they're destroying society.
So, I frankly think that pollution wafting its way from the PRC to the USA only serves the Americans right, and they I think the chinese should can all their pollution and send it to the states (or whoever else hired them to make te crap in te first place) and be done with it. This is not Chinese pollution. It is american pollution coming home where it belongs.
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Have these people never farted in a room and had someone across the room, complain of the smell.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
We can't even produce good old American pollution anymore.
Have gnu, will travel.
No wonder we haven't ratified the Kyoto protocol yet! We're biting the bullet for China..
Well, I wouldn't say biting the bullet, they're still bad enough as it is...
And don't respond with all the technical bullshit. Learn to sense a joke!
So is that what they mean when the French say "I fart in your general direction?"
[badum-ching]
A Human Right
That the US wasn't buying the crap that pollutants had a impact?
If you consider pollutants as a consumption issue, rather than as a production issue, then USA, being the largest consumers, should take some of the environmental responsibility too: That electronic gizzmo cost you $100 + your share of environmental "guilt".
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Has anyone else noticed the number of stories posted on slashdot by this guy "Anti-Globalism"? All with links to his website I might add. What gives?
Let's build a giant fan to blow it back.
Every time you call tech support, a little kitten dies.
The US didn't like pollution from making stuff at home so it had it made in China, from where it could import the stuff and leave the pollution. Now the Chinese make so much stuff for America that the pollution is coming home by itself anyway. The irony is almost tangible...
Let's start manufacturing the hell out over here. The Chinese can pollute? They've got NOTHING!!! My buddies didn't die face down in Vietnam just so that our country gets overtaken by buncha commies!!!
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
Sun Tzu wrote about subtlety in warfare....
Don't single out China/Asia. Countries have a massive effect upon each other. I live in far north Texas, and have seen haze/smoke from fires in central Mexico. I've always felt a large part of Texas's pollution problem is pollutants coming North. I've heard engineers talk about offering sulfer scrubbers to Eastern european coal-power plants to reduce smog here in the US.
Part of the problem is different countries worry about different types of pollution. In the US, we are more concerned about visible/long-term pollutants than invisible/short-term ones. Some other countries are completely unconcerned about things like leaded gasoline, which is still used in many countries but has been out of the US for decades. America has a bad record, but has gotten some things right in the end. Europeans make a big deal about CO2, but many European
beaches have incredibly toxic water, or land which is unfarmable. Thanks to American pollution reforms, life is even returning to New York's harbor.
Everything is a give/take. People are worrying about energy inefficient bulbs, replacing them with their more efficient fluorescent cousins, but are ignoring the problems those bulbs have with mercury. Or with LED bulbs, gallium aresenide. For example, the life returning to New York's harbor happens to be devouring all of the wooden structures built since they last died off.
Here's to losing my Karma Bonus again....
The US delegation at all those Global Warming summits was constantly saying over and over that the rest of thew world can cap emissions and lower pollution but if China and the like don't join in then it will be pointless. In response for this common sense information the US delegation was boo'd and jeered until they finally gave in an allowed a consensus to come forth that didn't demand anything of China and third world countries.
From the story:
others say the Asian pollution could destabilize weather patterns across the North Pacific, mask the effects of global warming...
So, you're telling me that Asian pollutants have the properties of reducing global warming. Whereas, U.S. pollutants add to global warming. So, if we want to stop global warming, we just need to start emitting Asian pollutants from our factories.
Implement a tariff based on pollution levels. Countries that have stricter rules and can produce things cleaner then get on equal cost-footing with massive-polluting countries that can produce things cheaper due to no (expensive) standards.
All proceeds go toward helping domestic companies reduce pollution in the form of interest bearing investments. For example, the US Govt will back a loan to my company for $100k at 1% interest to upgrade the office's insulation levels and install solar panels with the requirement that services and products be rendered only by domestic companies.
As much as I wish the free market could fix this, it can't. Free markets depend on the intelligence of its most basic users -- in our case, the general citizen consumer -- who cannot possibly have enough information to make the best choice.
The only challenge is coming up with what pollutants to base the standards on, and how to measure them fairly.
San Fransisco, Sept. 2 - For years, Americans in this picturesque city have been able to follow their dreams of selling their bodies to strangers on the street. Prostitution has always thrived here, and has always provided a means for men and women from all walks of life to support their cocaine habits. That is, until the recent wave of Asian prostitutes decimated the local industry.
Asian prostitutes, unlike their American counterparts, don't have an expensive crack habit to feed on top of paying off a pimp; instead, they are essentially indentured servants, with all of their fees going directly to their handlers. This efficiency means the savings are passed on to the customer, resulting in competition that local prostitutes consider unfair.
"Who do these gook bitches think they are? They come here to our country, with their little tits and their slanty eyes, and all the johns go apeshit. I've been doing this for seventeen years, and all of the sudden I don't even have enough in my pockets for a couple of rocks", a local prostitute who wished to remain anonymous griped to researchers.
Especially hard-hit has been the transvestite prostitute community. "I put a lot of work into making myself look fabulous", said Candy, a local tranny prostitute who was born and raised in San Fransisco. "I used to do allright on the street. Now, you have these Oriental Ladyboys with tiny waists, effeminate cheekbones and no body hair. How am I supposed to compete with that?"
...I'm less interested in pointing fingers. Besides, the US has a habit of shooting at fingers with hellfire missiles. Instead of "naming names", it would seem better to have a close to global tracking and monitoring of pollution in general, to show WHERE different types of pollution are a problem (regardless of source). You could then add in solar-powered UAVs to collect air samples at random points, where the isotope ratios are calculated and the pollutant sources (not necessarily the factories, just the sources) are derived. The factories can be inferred from plotting the pollution clouds, if anyone is genuinely concerned, but frankly I'd have thought that cleaning fuels and raw materials would have a bigger impact, as there are likely far fewer sources than factories, factories see cleaning as expensive, but higher grade fuels and materials are worth more to their producers. Ergo, cleaning at source will be seen as making money, cleaning at point of use will be seen as spending money, even though the end result (in terms of pollution, money-flow, profits, etc) should be absolutely identical.
Industrialists are, by and large, not very bright and highly prejudiced towards green-stuff feel-good factors. Which means that something that is good won't be accepted no matter how good it actually is, unless it is presented as something that'll feel good to their accountants. Being honest isn't worth a damn thing, but it isn't necessary to be honest to be accurate. This is why politics is a scam. Politicians don't sell you what you want, they sell you what they want dressed up to look like it's something you want. But you're quite capable of giving as good as you get.
Honest environmentalists go nowhere, although they usually get some recognition AFTER the disaster they predicted has swept through. Why? Because their phrasing makes it sound like people have to put in hard work and money for something that isn't 100% predictable anyway. Completely the wrong move. Think like Dogbert, not Dilbert, on this one. Dilbert always gets ignored, Dogbert always gets things done. The difference is not in what they're doing, but in the psychology. Dilbert assumes people are basically bright, compassionate and thoughtful. Dogbert assumes people are manipulative, deceitful, corrupt and 100% gullible. Environmentalists need to listen to Dogbert. Dilbert is correct, but will never go anywhere. In mythological terms, he represents the Wise Fool - he knows a lot but his attempts to explain make him sound like a complete fool.
Saving money has never worked, any better than saving the planet, but if the first part of the "food chain" decides cleanliness is next to richness, it gets imposed on everyone else regardless. They have no choice but to go green. They won't even be aware they've done so. Things'll cost more, but as gas prices have demonstrated, customers ignore that until the last possible moment, and then blame it on anyone they happen to dislike at the time. Use that self-inflicted blindness to make consumers green, and the world will be cleaner within a year without the consumers ever noticing what you're doing. If they say anything, it'll be to flame the environmentalists for doom-saying about pollution and greenhouse gasses, same as they did with Y2K after several trillion dollars were spent in fixing flaws across the world.
(And, yes, for those who care, Y2K did strike older electronic credit-card readers, older banking systems, and many home and office products - including many of Microsoft's. If they'd done nothing, the world might well have ended. Instead, the fixes were imposed on an unwilling and ignorant population in such a way that they remained unwilling and ignorant. And that is the SOLE reason you are still breathing today.)
What Y2K demonstrated was that the masses are dumb, but that really doesn't matter. You can fix what does matter without ever concerning yourself with the widespread ignorance in the world. In this case, you can fix mines, quarries, power stations, oil, coal, and all kinds of other resources, with the help of a handful of executives who can make a mint off the deal. Do that, and national follies will be of no importance whatsoever.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
I recall hearing that airborne pollutants from China were found in Lake Superior in the 1980s.
Advice: on VPS providers
The fact that some Americans are now worried about the effects of OTHER countries' pollution on the local American environment seems hypocritical, at best. I wonder: did the Chinese press publish articles in the past century decrying the effects of American and European pollution on their local environment? The globe was first awash in American and European pollution for nearly a century (or more, depending on whether one assumes pollution only began with the industrial revolution). How can we expect them to not repeat our actions when we've never shown sufficient remorse or reparations for those actions? This article sounds a bit like the ex-Hippie parent trying to convince their child not to try LSD.
One might consider this pollution to be a clear and present danger to the health of loyal Americans.
If products made overseas had the same environmental rules and regulations, they wouldn't be so cheap. Let's also not forget how much fuel cargo ships burn on a round trip across the Pacific to the US. We can reduce much pollution by buying locally made goods. We should level the playing field by requiring products sold in a country (US or otherwise) have the same environmental controls as those made locally. Now that we are talking about the environmental controls that need to be put in place, how about labor? If labor controls were the same as in a developed nation ... you know the rest.
[rant continues] Would products made in China be so cheap if they had the same standards as us? Etc etc etc
Environmental over-regulation in the US drives up prices for manufacturers and other businesses. This leads them to move to China and other developing countries with very lax environmental standards. Pollution is increased a lot.
Just setting environmental standards at a rational level in the US might allow these companies to stay here. They could run a clean operation. It might not be perfect or "sustainable", but it would be clean and suitable by any rational standard.
Environmental over-regulation and utopianism actually results in greater pollution in these cases. Carbon cap-and-trade schemes will just increase this phenomenon. And it shifts pollution to poorer, less-empowered populations.
I agree with your statement entirely. However: who better to convince a kid to not try LSD than someone who has already tried it? The old dude who taught woodshop in high school and was missing a couple fingers was *way* more convincing when he talked about safety, than the safety movies.
I'm not defending being a hypocrite. I'm just saying that if people learn from their mistakes, they're good teachers with respect to those mistakes. To be a hypocrit is to *keep* doing something (like burning 1/4 the world's fossil fuels) while complaining about other people doing the same thing. Ex-hippie parents probably aren't being hypocrites about the LSD, while the USA being pissed about Chinese pollution, is indeed being a hypocrite.
Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
Such hypocrisy!
Oh yeah, it's totally the Asian pollution causing the problem, never mind the fact that the US produces more pollution both overall and per capita than the US.
China has over 4x the population and still make less pollution than the US. It's the American's SUVs that are the problem.
and clogs up the whiney presses there. You aint seen nothing yet. Wait until China sbecoems the worlds largest economy in 15 years. And it still grow much larger.
When the poles re-align and the planet starts spinning in the opposite direction in 2012, as it has seven times previously in the planets history (check the archeology, its true), as predicted by the Mayan calendar, Nostradamus and Edgar Cayce, it will usher in the next ice age. The vast majority of the planets human population will be wiped out and the environment will cleanse and repair itself so that in a few 100,000 years, we can do it all over again. As we have several times before. Ever wonder how it is that we (humans) have been here for 400,000 years but we only have visibility of the last 10,000 years of history? All we have to show for the rest is a very spotty fossil record. What were we doing for 390,000 years? We are biologically the same animal with all the same intellect and capacities. Yeah, that's because 2-3 times in the 390,000 years almost all of us got wiped out and we started over, clueless, just as we are now.
Yes we effect the environment. We either speed up or slow down the planets natural cycles but we really have no clue as to all the ways we do and what we should do differently. We are guessing. CO2 isn't it. CO2 levels have been dramatically higher at multiple times in recent history and even more so in distant past. You think pulling metals, oil and coal out of the planet might effect its magnetic fields? Gee I wonder.
We are a big metal top. Spinning in space being driven by magnetics. When you change the composition of the top and the weight distribution of its center, the magnetic fields change. We are damn near retarded when it comes to understanding the true nature of existence or even our own small insignificant place in it.
Lighten up. Be happy. No one gets out alive.
That reminds me of something I heard way back when they allowed smoking on airlines.
"Having a smoking section in a plane is like having a peeing section in a pool."
The US has been the largest polluter for awhile. China has only just over taken the US. Where was the outcry about what US pollution is doing to Asia?
What is worse yet, imo, is what western society's computer waste is doing to other countries. It should be illegal to dump that sort of stuff outside of your own country. Then people will think twice about it.
Of course this is nothing new. Not long ago, Japan was "the place that produced cheap crap". Now Japanese labor is relatively expensive and Japan offshore their work. Same thing is happening in Korea and many other places too.
What really has to change to ward of fear of diminished resources is for people to stop linking quality of life with material consumption. When you're starving then it makes sense, but right now obese people outnumber starving people so there is no food shortage, there is a consumption problem. It really needs people to stop using excessive consumption as a pill for their social ills. Getting a new cellphone every year != a high quality of life.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Lol... I wish I had MOD points +5 funny.
This is sounding very similar to the what has already been occuring to countries in the southern hemisphere for the last 20-30 years. CFC's and other ODS's produced mostly in the northern hemisphere have contributed substaially to the depeltion of the ozone layer resulting in a hole over antarctic regions.
Whilst the depeltion of overall or worldwide ozone is minimal (debatable), the regional effect is far more siginificant.
The cost of this pollution to some countires is a soaring rate of skin cancer. http://www.sunsmart.com.au/browse.asp?ContainerID=1752
Having lived in New Zealand and Australia for the last 30 years i can tell you that summer has gone from a case of wearing sunscreen of SPF 4 in the late 70's to applying multiple coats of SPF20+ through out the day and avoiding direct sunlight where possible. Failure to do this now will result in serios burning in a matter of 10-20 mins. Often foriengers from "ozone abundant" northern countires learn this the hard way in the summer! :)
Can we stop giving Anti-Globalism so much attention here? He's such a negative nancy.
It isn't.
It pretty much has never been.
Per person countries like Trinity & Tobago and the UAE pollute a LOT more. The US is something like #10-#30 per person.
Ever since the rise of Neo-Maoism (Stalin-communism hold the communism) the chinese have been ramping up to be the #1 polluters. I think in 2000-2004 they surpassed the US, or got very close.
That is a nice graph and all...
How do they measure pollution?
How accurate is it?
Are the graphs a reflection of actual pollution, or a measure of better record keeping?
I had a friend complaining how the U.S. "uses the most energy per capita." I asked him how they measure it. (yup, I read Feynman)
Do they only count only coal, oil, and electricity?
What about locally produced energy? Do they count all the (inefficient) cooking fires in 3rd world countries?
What about countries where the government officials fudge the statistics to get a bonus or make their boss happy?
Not trolling, just honest questions.
How can we expect them to not repeat our actions when we've never shown sufficient remorse or reparations for those actions? This article sounds a bit like the ex-Hippie parent trying to convince their child not to try LSD.
... remorse? What has that got do with anything? This is completely irrelevant and clouds any meaningful discussion. You're also demeaning the untold millions of human beings affected by the poor decision-making of China's leaders. They don't care one whit about your whining: all they know is that they can't see the Sun and their kids are sick. These are real problems: sitting around deciding who should say they're sorry is just stupid.
{sigh} enough with the complaints about hypocrisy and what the hell
Fact is, we aren't talking about hippies or kids or LSD. We're talking about the effects of an unregulated industrial economy which has already caused immeasurable harm to the population that runs it, and is poised to caused even more death and infirmity.
Another factoid for you, America has done more to clean up its industrial and manufacturing output than pretty much anyone else. Yes, we're still polluting, but there haven't been too many Love Canals lately (look that up if you want to see how far we've come.) I deal with companies working to comply with EPA (State and Federal) regulations all the time: they're strict and compliance is expensive. Non-compliance is even more expensive. China has nothing on the U.S. when it comes to environmental regulation and enforcement. Period.
We're not going to deal with what's going on unless people face a few facts: America got past its period of unregulated industry, and the consequences of the period are plain for all to see. China deliberately chose to ignore our history, our example, and they have no-one but themselves to blame.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
I have noticed that the maples were starting to turn in early august. In addition, the aspens here started about 2 weeks ago. Normally, both start about 2 weeks later. Deciduous trees drop their leaves based on amount of light, not on temps. As such, they are fairly predictable. The fact that they are dropping early indicates that less light is reaching here. I do wonder what will happen if China clears up their air of hard core pollutants while still pushing loads of CO2 (IOW, become like America and EU)?
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I remember two decades ago (and still ongoing) that the US is pumping pollution into the Red River (among others) which travels into Canada. We complained and they said tough. But, apparently it's a horror if it's done to them.
Perhaps it is this that forces the US to realise that the world map doesn't end at its borders.
decides to HEEL thyself, and crushes poor fucker on/under his/her behind... Meaning, Mr. Ed didn't appreciate the "reach around"... A horse is a horse, of course, of course...
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Here we go again, 10 billion POUNDS. I would say that I just farted, injecting nearly 10 gatrillion nano-ounces into the precious atmosphere.
But let's put 10 billion POUNDS into perspective. That's 20 million tons, or, roughly 2E7 / 5000 teratons or 2E7 / 5E15 or really 0.0000005% of the atmosphere.
It's NOTHING.
This is my sig.
Might change the meaning of "Pollution Credits".... This crap is coming home to roost because executives didn't want the pollution onus in the form of liabilities and responsibilities...
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
We STILL have companies spewing chemicals into the air. Even in the marine industry, engineers cheated on pollutions regulations by simply running a bypass or disconnecting polluted discharge lines from sensors meant to measure and log the overboard discharges (which the US Coast Guard caught wind of and brought charges against such owners/operators/masters/ and engineers).
When I worked with liquid toner copiers in the late 80's it was our common practice to take the liquid toner (ink) and dispersant bottles and simply dump down the drain if we could, and if there was nowhere to pour it, then place the bottles in the customers' waste bins. Failing that (in the hip/environmental offices), we'd have to take it with us and dispose elsewhere. I am glad i got out of that job. Doing that dumping gnawed at more conscience. Working with the chemicals eroded my health. Fingers clean by Sunday night, dirty by Tuesday... a year of that shit.
We still have gasoline leaks. We still have major post-product pollution. Why do we not have ordinances compelling fast food restaurants provide drain bins to collect the unfinished drinks and ice the customers otherwise dump in the garbage? When I in Dec 2004 - Feb 05 was in Tokyo area cities such as Roppongi and Miyamaedaira and Shimbashi, I ate at McDonalds that had marked recepticals for separation of plastic, paper, non-recyclables and liquids. That's easy for "typically conformist" Japanese to do. Asking 'merkun public to do it by request, backed up by fines or risk shut-down of their favorite location eatery would spark insurrection. So much for "a kind, gentle, peace-loving people"...
Yeh, and people, don't tell me that the liquids in the garbage help speed up the composting/decomposition of the waste. It could also be argued that pre-separation of liquids in restaurant waste might make it easier to separate recyclables such as the papers and food that animals might otherwise eat if not broken down by soda and coffee and such.
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Climate change is still the greatest global environmental threat, by far. And the cumulative mass of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere, the major cause of global warming, is still overwhelmingly American. Why not do something about it?
I'm not saying that the US's total irresponsibility about what it's doing to the climate of the Earth absolves the Chinese. But Americans would look far less like hypocrites if they solved their own problems -- or at least made some sincere effort to start solving them -- before lecturing other countries so aggressively about theirs.
Logic.
China.
/.'ers seem to forget where the investors that made China what it is today came from.
Somehow
China is a problem because they do the laundry without complaining about the skid marks.
"Violence is the last refuge of the competent, and, generally, the first refuge of the incompetent" - Thing_1
i lost interest when i saw the link to corrupt.org. that website is a fucking load of nonsense anti business propaganda. they wouldn't know a balanced assessment if it slapped them in the face and raped their mother.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Just for the record, US is still the biggest polluter, and closer to Europe than china is to US.
I am not saying that China should pollute more, but if they were polluting, per-person, as much as the US does, this planet would not be habitable for much longer.
Please don't drive petrol powered cars! I am nearly 40 and have kids and we manage just fine without a car. I get sick from seeing so many cars on the road.
"And it's All the US's Fault!"
No, but its part of the problem...
People refuse to pay extra for non polluting production methods because of the free-rider problem. You waste time complaining about the concern of businessmen for their "bottom line" when you should be talking about the U.S. consumers who actually buy the products. The problem is there is no incentive for a US consumer to buy environmentally friendly products because their purchase, averaged over the entire atmosphere, has only a very, very small net effect. 300 million people make the same decision, and here we are.
The solution, somewhat ironically, is to do what we are doing right now, namely complain about the problem until we get together to enforce regulations that benefit everyone. Unfortunately, people like you seem to prefer the status quo because you are upset by the lack of altruism exhibited by your peers. Less moralizing, more problem solving, please.
Relax I just want some peanuts.
this year in Power emission pollution. Consider China is less efficient, and has 5 times population than the U.S., it consumes less energy, pollutes less, and makes most of the goods, until today. Guys got the nerve to complain. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/26/AR2008082603096.html
As a whole, has more renewable energy than anyone else.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
I don't like making statements like this, but my gut instinct says that it's a really bad idea to fuck around with the Environment to the degree that it's noticeable on a global scale, even if there are some positive effects.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
OMG. Asia != China.
Paul Erlich was a little off, but I see that this is an issue with the ever-growing population on the planet. Simply put, the more developed nations consume the most resources (we have 5% of the population yet consume 25% of the world's energy), though at least have the slowest birthrates. China's high population combined with rapid development means high pollution, increased world demand for resources, and a more population and development issues beyond air pollution.
consumer crap.
If the US would produce stuff that works for a decade, no one would replace their stuff each year. (Yeah, China isn't any better).
And one more word: Kyoto.
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
The US has clean water and air. That's why all the nut jobs have jumped onto the "global warming" wagon.
*Hmph*
I wonder if the US gov/companies ever cares about their polluants in Asia...
And did you ever see a pick-up truck in europe as means of personal transport?
I drove from Denmark (Copenhagen) to Switzerland (Bern) recently. I was in Frankfurt am Main before I ran into the first American style 'big ass' SUV pickup. Europeans often drive smaller hatchbacks. The VW Fox/Polo/Golf, Opel Corsa and Peugeot 107/207 seem to be particularly popular in Germany and so are bigger saloon cars from makers like the BMW, Audi, Mazda, VW, Opel, Skoda, Citroen... the list goes on. You also get some CUVs. Subaru and Suzuki are popular in rural areas because they build even small hatchbacks and saloons with a 4x4 drive. Gigantic American style SUVs are pretty much a rarity. You probably wouldn't have an easy time navigating something like a Dodge Ram through many European cities, towns and villages (especially the model with the double rear wheels that requires two parking spaces). In many of these places the streets date back to medieval times and are very narrow. Another point is of course the fact that gas prices are high and people can generally think of better things to spend their money on than quenching an SUV's thirst for fuel. I drive a small 3 door diesel hatchback. On may way through Denmark the clerk at a Statiol station got the pumps mixed up and tried to bill me for the Diesel tanked by a small SUV. I was really shocked to see the size of the bill which was about 4 times what I had just tanked for (about 180 DKR and the tank on my car was 2/3 empty). I shudder to think what it wold cost to fill up the tank on a Dodge Ram.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
Which, except for the hideously inefficient limos and transport costs for hookers and coke does not produce a lot of CO2.
There's a lot of blame to go around for the pollution problem in the world. Yes, Asia is certainly a large part of it. But so is the US and Europe.
WE are the ones buying all the cheap crap made in China et al.
If WE demand (with the help of import restrictions) that any imported products come from industries with proper pollution controls, the industries will obey, because they have no other choice.
Your story is completely lost on these jerks on www.slashdot.org.
Your message will be ignored. You message will be laughed at. And worst still, it will be modded funny.
If you want to address a more discerning crowd, write for New York Times.
No, the oil is not being pulled out of the ground as fast as possible. Countries that produce oil deliberately limit the amount the extract to limit supply; if we used less, they'd extract less.
(Can you blame them? If I had oil, I'd sell it at the highest profit, too.)
Obligatory Soundbite Catchphrase
Yea, the US is kind of hypocritical. It was ok for us to give Canada acid rain, but China has their revolution and "Oh noez, acid rain, teh horrorz".
ROFL
We haven't got a leg to stand on. You can't say that we don't have as much industry, it's just in third world countries running unregulated now in sweat shops and un-unionized factories.
-Viz
Don't kid yourself. It's the size of the regexp AND how you use it that counts.
When the Olympics were in Atlanta did they have to shut down every factory for dozens of miles just go go from 100, to 10 times acceptable particulate levels?
No, because we already shut that crap down in the 1970s. Of course, the current administration has done everything in its power to reverse the gains made in the mid-20th century, and the Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton administrations were not significantly better.
China's working through the same series of mistakes and remedies that we did thirty years ago, while we merrily backslide towards the 19th century. Next thing you know, the Vice President of the USA will start lobbying in favor of slavery... he what? Oh, D'OH!
The very fact that they want to study the effects should be a matter of concern. Who said something about 'Los Angeles' in reference to US defense policy in reference to Taiwan? Think The Art of War.
I'd rather be xenophobic because the alternative is suicide.
Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
you can't say pollution isn't a problem in the us can you? before those problems aren't solved in such a high standard country we can't complain about china for polluting the atmosphere. this does not mean the situation in china shouldn't be changed rapidly but it should as well in all the other countries on this planet.
This has possibilities. For each shipload of consumer goods that comes here the Chinese have to accept the presence of a couple of treehuggers from this part of the world. It would be an education for both parties.
Ah. An excellent example of American selfishness. Asian pollutants will impact on US? It is nothing, then, that those pollutants will impact on other countries, or that US pollutants will? This article is stupid to the core.
partisans on the left, partisans on the right, nationalists of every nationality...
Who's obstructing action on any if the things you mentioned? Not those on the left. Complain about politics all you want, but the reality is that the right wing is the obstacle to progress on pollution and global warming, and they have to be overcome if we're going to accomplish anything.
Yes.... China is the biggest polluter, but US is the biggest polluter by person.
It is hypocritical to point to China where US pollute per
inhabitant a lot more.
...
If you want to address a more discerning crowd, write for New York Times.
Oooooooh, That's harsh.
Film at 11.
And I don't agree, you absolutely did take it out of context.
So now what?
You also failed to address my point, which completely refuted your attempt at drawing equivalence, but that's no surprise, you resort to paraphrasing quotes out of context so you're not exactly someone I'd expect rational debate from.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
Your other point was a deliberate red herring, which I had the right to ignore. But I'll address it anyway.
The world laughed at Bush's initial statement:
Notice that Bush did not say or imply anything about the legality of invading democracies versus dictatorships. He added the qualifier days later, in a typical Bushian revision of history, after the world ridiculed him for his hypocrisy.
When told you were wrong and that I disagree, your best attempt at an argument is to call me a liar?
Yes, when I said you weren't capable of rational debate, your "nuh uh you did not" was definitive proof I was right.
And just so we're clear, you don't know what a red herring is. If you did, you'd realize that your total failure to address the obvious dissimilarities between a dictatorship, and a democratically elected government is as far from a red herring as one could get.
By your logic, Nazi Germany or Pol Pot is no different than a freely elcted government.
I have to wonder why you'd try to pass off such a stupid assertion.
I also have to wonder why you think you can dismiss a point you can't refute by pretending it's a red herring.
Again, so we're clear, it matters if a country is a dictatorship or not. Whether Bush mentioned it is irrelevant, as anyone who isn't retarded understands there's a difference.
Your opinion changes nothing.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS
Because I wasn't wrong.
You, however, cannot use the same reason for not admitting you said a bunch of stupid shit that demonstrated you're not very smart.
I do like that you admitted I destroyed you though.
To quote LongNoi "QZTR was right and won't leave me alone because I called him a moron when I was wrong" FYS