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.
... 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.
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"
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.
They're learning the art of capitalism from the best.
Unsafe cost-cutting isn't just a Chinese thing, you know.
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.
I recall a documentary (BBC?) on a Icelandic volcano named Laki some 200 years back which blighted Europe. The show focused on a cloud of volcanic gas and the resultant illness that occurred among rural peasants. The speculation was that this was probably the result of silica in the cloud being breathed by those who worked outside. Similarly the 1815 eruption of Tambora caused the "Year without Summer" with famine among the Swiss, and unique weather reported in Pennsylvania. Pollutants are not in this league, but, they can indeed have world ranging effect.
- Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
Well, I don't know if you noticed, but you may not have seen the sun during the olympics. Reason: particulate pollution is so bad in most of China you cannot see the sun most of the time. While CO2 certainly is a greenhouse gas - particulate pollution acts as a cooling agent in the atmosphere. Here in the US we have at least some regulation on what industries can pump into the atmosphere, and have really made some great strides in reducing particulate pollution since the 70's.
Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
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
Ethnocentric? The fact that pollution from europe can reach the US in 3 weeks is just illustrating that pollution travels. Presumably, thats just based on a study that found that. No one is saying pollution from the US never goes to china, it's just likely that hasn't been specifically tested and would therefore be illogical to use to support the argument.
Why is it you're so anxious to see ethnocentrism? You really had to distort things to come away with that conclusion. Are you a lawyer who has found a way to sue scientists for ethnocentrism?
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.
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.
Well said, it all pretty much started with Nixon when he opened trade and continued through Clinton and Bush. Everyone couldn't resist the money that China had to offer so they'd do anything and accept anything despite the human rights abuses as well as pollution. China never had to compromise their position even in the slightest. At least as far as I'm aware.
A tax or tariff based on pollution involved would encourage people to buy goods from places which are more neighbor friendly and would be fair since it's based on something tangible. The money could be used to help fund energy research or perhaps even more importantly cleanup efforts. This wouldn't be a bad idea per company instead of per country as some items produce less pollution than others during manufacturing.
The problem with taxing like this is that it wouldn't really have to stop at pollution as other causes could easily be picked up as well which could start a downward spiral so I'm not exactly sure what the correct course of action is beyond my own purchasing habits.
The oil is being pulled out of the ground as fast as possible, and burned as fast as it's pulled out of the ground. What difference does it make who burns it? If the demand in China were less, it would just end up being burned elsewhere.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Unsafe cost-cutting isn't just a Chinese thing, you know.
It's not cost cutting, it's just ignoring externalities.
If you don't care about pollution, then pollution controls are unrelated to costs.
China & other developing countries literally don't care, though China may be coming around.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
We can't even produce good old American pollution anymore.
Have gnu, will travel.
Well, as I recall, in Athens, things were pretty bright. I don't recall seeing a good shadow this last olympics. Additionally, the last time I was in china, I did not see the sun for 4 weeks. And no, its not "fog" its pollution so bad that when it rains, the streets and buildings get covered with a film of black stuff.
Prediction: The real iPhone killer is going to be sex robots from Japan. Think about it.
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.
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....
Yeah because we all know how very willing USA is to sacrifice anything for a cleaner environment / better world.
Stupid chinese people! Trying to catch up, teh horrorz!
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.
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.
That's just ridiculous.
Really, if the facts were known about asbestos, people wouldn't buy something asbestos-lined, and there would be demand for another product.
Buying an asbestos-lined crib in that case is just irresponsible. Build your own!
Seriously, arguments like that can be (and sadly, frequently are) used to justify the most egregious nanny-state abuses.
How about a little personal responsibility? Oh, I'm sorry, I suppose it's for the government to decide what your responsibility is, as well?
Que statist vs. libertarian flamewar in 3, 2, 1....
http://clightnirish.wordpress.com/
...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)
First off, they are doing things which never occurred in the US at that kind of scale. The US remains the only major industrialized nation to not do things in that fashion.
Second of all, they're never going to catch up with us doing things the way that they're doing them. The only reason why corporations have Chinese labor is because China makes it impossible for workers to receive a fair wage. Things like the lack of Chinese ownership in so many industries and the purposeful devaluation of their own currency make it tough to do.
Lastly, in the US growth was never as out of control as it is in China. Our businesses don't expand without consideration of the future business implications. We don't build up manufacturing capacity indefinitely; our businesses have always had the ability to put spare change in banks paying decent interest.
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.
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.
And you, my friend, are not only a hypocrite but an irrational one. We aren't discussing atomic weapons, warfare, or our form of government. We're discussing pollution being generated by China.
... we'll, we're still the greatest manufacturer. That comes with a price. That's true when you buy products made by any industrialized nation. We've done more than most when it comes to cleaning up our act, and I suggest you educate yourself before you speak out in such an ignorant fashion again.
So fine. You want to talk about us? Here's some information for you. The fact is (yes, fact) that America has spent one metric fuckton of hard-earned taxpayer cash on environmental cleanup and maintenance, and has some of the strictest regulations on the books. I know, I work in the petroleum industry and I have a pretty damn good idea what U.S. environmental requirements cost our industrial base. A HELL of a lot more than it costs China, which has nothing comparable.
So far as the U.S. being the greatest polluter
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
That sounds like a pretty naive statement. The consumer in general is very nearly powerless compared with the corporation when it comes to actually finding out the facts. It's not like the company is going to say, "Buy our new product---now with more asbestos and lead paint." That's why we have product safety laws. The consumer generally isn't in a position to judge whether a product is safe because the consumer is not and cannot reasonably be expected to be an expert in every possible field (chemistry, metallurgy, etc.).
The consumer similarly can't reasonably be expected to keep mental track of every possible dangerous substance that might be in a product. Human memory covers the big two or three---lead, asbestos, mercury---but when you're buying toothpaste, do you know to look in the ingredients list and avoid buy products that contain diethylene glycol? Tetrachlorobiphenyl? Methyl tertiary butyl ether? For that matter, without consumer protection laws, do you honestly expect that the manufacturers would continue to list ingredients at all? After all, if you don't list the ingredients, you can get away with cutting corners. And lest you believe that one business would rat out the other to gain a market advantage if they caught them doing something unsafe, that business will just rat out the other one (whether truthfully or not), and nobody will know who to believe, so they'll just keep buying what they've always bought.
I agree that consumers should take personal responsibility for egregious abuse---somebody suing for injury because he stuck his hand into a toaster, for example---but that doesn't mean it's acceptable for a company to build a lawnmower with no cover over the blades and "let the market decide". A reasonable degree of protection from egregious abuse by companies is just as important as having a reasonable degree of protection from frivolous suits by complete idiots. You really have to draw a line somewhere or the corporations will walk all over you.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
All of that is well and good, but it's so much more enlightened crack on the U.S. while excusing other countries.
There has to be a huge disconnect from reality to think that our environmental policy is equivalent to the total disregard that the Chinese government shows. <sarcasm>I'm sure that you can walk into any Chinese factory and see their MSDSs, I'm sure that if 5 gallons of fuel is spilled at a Chinese gas station they have to go through the same remediation steps as in the U.S., and I'm sure that there are toys and everyfuckingthing else made with lead in the States.</sarcasm>
I been all over the world and, aside from Western Europe, Canada, Australia and the U.S., the disregard for pollution in the rest of the world is so bad that when you get home your fucking clothes smell like diesel or sulphur. The people who posted that shit above have obviously never been to China or any other developing nation.
So this is what Slashdot has come to. As long as the opinion is popular, it gets modded Insightful. Forget that he uses such exemplary language as "get your arrogant head out of your ass", "suck Bush' dick", and "fucking hypocrits". Forget that 3/4 of the post is Offtopic or that he's building up straw men instead of backing up his assertions with reason. He criticized Bush, so he must be Insightful!
Indeed. The US would have far more influence in the world by simply not being so embarrassingly hypocritical. (One of many, many examples: Bush telling the Russians that they have no right to invade other countries. Gag. Cringe.)
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.
First off, the US is the greatest polluter in the world
And lastly, they are not.
By far they are not.
Support your points, troll.
"By far"? We were only overtaken in Co2 emissions this year. Before that, we were "by far" the leader.
In other areas (there's more to pollution than Co2), we are still the leader.
Be my guest and look it up.
Hell, why not listen to George Bush? He seems pretty proud of us being the world's biggest polluter: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/2277298/President-George-Bush-'Goodbye-from-the-world's-biggest-polluter'.html
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"
You're an idiot then (see posts below).
If China had the same production levels of the US they would be polluting massively more.
What is your point? Production efficiency may be one thing, but pollution output is a different thing. Maybe they are less efficient... Maybe we are more efficient. That does not undo the REALITY of the actual amount of pollution that is being produced.
I don't think a person with dirt on their hands can point at another person with dirt on theirs and complain about it.
There is a difference between patriotism and indigence. Open your eyes and be real with yourself, your country, the world, and reality.
You wrote a lot of words, made a lot of false assumptions, and attempted to perpetuate misinformation about human impact on the environment (aka global warming).
In all that, you still reinforced my point by saying "So to recap, Sure the US pollutes more. That's because it does more."
Thank you.
Efficiency, restriction, and your other elaborate reasonings, have no actual impact on the REAL end result: We pollute more than those we complain about. The reasoning you provided are only diversion of focus from one topic to another. We could be talking about efficiency, but we aren't. We are talking about pollution production and whether one country ought point fingers at another country of equivalent pollution production.
If you want to change the subject to your ballpark, just say "I'm going to argue about efficiency, not real pollution."
Kyoto.. LOL.. Your one of those people.
Well, tell me, what country has made it's goal in meeting the guidelines of Kyoto? Hmm? Well, you only have 37-38 countries to pick from, so tell me. Oh, I know there is something like 157 or 187 some shit like that who have signed on, but only 35-40 have caps on their Co2 so pick one and tell me which one has made progress. I'll tell you what, Germany is the closes and their progress is a combination of an accounting error that inflated their 1990 standards and almost a negative population growth. In fact, Germany's progressive and expensive solar plan hasn't even made a dent in their over all production of Co2.
So while the word is that Kyoto is the wholly grain of environmental activism, it has achieved almost nothing to date. And the achievements it has produced is by exporting industry which is the reason that 130 or more countries who had no intention of limiting emissions signed on. Kyoto is flawed from the start. It is little more then a redistribution of wealth scheme that has only worked at redistributing wealth. We were right to not get involved in it and we are still right to date to not have been involved in it. In fact, we have limited Co2 production more from a private market giving the people what they want then the Kyoto accord have in any given country.
And no, I don't consider shipping industry off to India and China (the current biggest polluter) as a reduction in emissions. It is only putting it somewhere else in the world. It is either a problem in the world or it isn't. Moving emissions from Europe to India or China isn't reducing anything regardless of calling it Kyoto or not. You should actually look into the shit before just assuming a fancy name and Al Gore means everything in the world.
I'm a Belgian (European) and I think you are an idiot
It's true.. China overtook the us as the largest pollutor last year.. then again.. 75% of stuff you buy has been entirly or partially made in China. So following your philosophy, that's ok..
Oh come on.. decisions at earlier stages then the rest of the world ? What decisions ? To sit on your fat corporate sponsered ass and do nothing about it ? we've known about this pollution thingy since the 80ies and you still are not able to make a decent car which doesn't need 50 gallons to get off your driveway.. I do 37 miles to the gallon with my BMW and a sporty driving style.. I can probably add another 5 to 10 miles if i drove less moderate or inner city... " yes.. our children need to inherit the earth, But to do so.. we must drive them to school in our 5200 cc cars". What examples can you give of reducing pollution ? what laws have been passed to force this on companies and indivuals ?
The global warming scam ? Right. and you call the other guy the moron ? It's not because the world didn't turn in to a microwave overnight, that globaly warming is a scam.. Don't worry.. we will get their soon enough... Btw: There is other stuff then "global warming".. where do you think all these cancers come from ? We are eating, drinking and breathing the crap we have put on this planet for the last 180 years or so on a daily bases..
In concern to Bush, the corporate puppet.. Honestly.. 'let the markets do it?'.. these guys are in it for the profit.. the fire thousands of people just to keep their profits on the usual level.. you think, all of a sudden, they are going to drop a couple of million $, because it is the right thing to do for the enviroment ? Having some solar power and wind power farms and a couple of celebrities with a prius (which is more pulluting than a regular car due to the production process btw) doesn't make you a cutting edge country my friend...
So to recap.. China produces a lot more these days.. so they are ok.. Luckely, they have a dictatorship which apparently can fix the problem in peking in the mather of a couple of years for the olympics.. so there is a chance that when they notice the rest of the country, they will actually take meassures instead of japping about it.. In concern to the Kyoto story.. It might not be as effective as it was intended, but at least they are working on it.. Saying that the EU countries just shipped everything off to india is ignorant.. sure, we moved some production fascilities to India and China (just like you guys) but next to that, A LOT of laws have been passed which companies had to adapt to in a certain amount of time.. some of them choose to bail to other countries, some took it upon theirself to follow this through in ALL their production fascilities around the world.. even before the local country asked them to..
So in the end.. it's easy to say us is better, EU is better.. but don't forget that next to countries as a whole, there are indivuals.. china has a lot of them, let's just hope they don't become as ignorant as us ( both us and eu) and all start driving around in cars, using a/c's and stuff.. but now, while they have the chance.. invest in isolation of houses so they don't need so much heating/cooling down.. develop cars running on alternate fuels instead of keeping them in their R&D labs until the fuel prices are hurting their sales,start using alternative materials that are degradable or can be recyled, keep going to markets instead of buying everything in stores with 20 plastic or other wrappings around it...use rainwater for their toilets and gardens instead of the tap water.. they are a new and developing country as opposed to us , who have grown attached to our luxery and only want to do something for the eviroment if it doesn't pulls us out of our comfort zone.. But don't get up there and pose as if the US is the big good guy giving the example for the enviroment, cause you are not...
The US remains the only major industrialized nation to not do things in that fashion.
Is that because in the US the US IS THE ONLY INDUSTRIALIZED NATION?
Or are you suggesting that industries polute more in europe? I seriously doubt that USA in general would behave better to the environment than Sweden do. Feel free to prove me wrong.
Of course they will get better paid later on, this will be a problem for any developing nation but they have accepted that some people will get rich first, but in the end hopefully they will all benefit from it. Thought in very capitalisic countries not every does I guess, Japan and the USA is the two countries with the biggest gaps between very rich and very poor people if I remember correctly.
Are you sure it's smaller?
Also some other idiot pointed out that they made less money in china and how they at the same income level (and therefor raising productivity if you want to look at it that way) would polute even more and much more than the US. But if they had more money I'm very confident they would invest more money in keeping things clean. But it's hard to do when you don't have large margins I guess.
Anyway the polution per capita in the western world will lead a hell of a lot over china, even more if you considering THEY ARE POLUTING FOR US, IT'S WE WHO BUY THEIR PRODUCTS.
In the end it's the consumers and how we live which affect things.