Who Looks Forward more Environmentally: U.S. or China?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/26/opinion/26friedman.html?_r=2&src=me&ref=general

Very depressing news today, out of the NY times:

I was just starting elementary school. Even so, I'm old enough to remember the USSR flinging the first bit of space junk into orbit. It was PANIC mode here in the U.S.A. back then. Now, our soon-to-be 3rd world status doesn't hardly make the news. I kind of realized we are/were falling behind ... but knowing we're selling off the technology so we can be passed over is creepy. Is it time for me to buy the chinese version of Rosetta Stone (language CD's)? Or am I over-reactiing.

.

China is focused on restoring its former status as a superpower. The US is focused on the next election.

Well, the U.S does not have plumes of Airborne crap flowing towards Austraiilia tha can be seen from space....

In three hundred years it won't matter who did it, only that it was done.

We offshored our pollution to China.

We are responsible for Chinas pollution.
Ultimately we are the consumers who cause Chinas, and the worlds, pollution.
We are the ultimate end user.

In our corporatocracy, all that matters is the next election and the next quarters profits.

I admire china 4 their ability to look at hard realities. They do now realize That's major sacrifices today are necessary to survive in the future.

Many criticize china For their governmental policies It seems to take human rights To a much lower level Then we enjoy here In the united states.

So who is right? Us or them?.

We are simply imploding From the weight of social consciousness. Power overwhelming need To the politically correct to everyone Is destroying us

It is pretty easy to forget in our short sighted/short memory western world view that the Chinese are OLD! They have been building and preserving an empire for a couple of thousand years! And here we are barely 200 years old, and only a century after becoming a world power, on the big decline!

Any world power that spends as much of it's gdp on the military industrial complex and does so year after year, will inevitably spend itself into bankruptcy. (see also USSR!).

As has been said else where on this forum, if we had spent a fraction of what we spend on the military net/net ~$1.5-2 trillion per annum of late, on energy independence, renewable energy, and good environmental stewardship we would be very much further ahead.

If we had been less interested in the next election/ quarterly report, and focused ahead 10-20-100 years we would also be further ahead, but the current political climate precludes that. We have little leadership and even less vision.

Icarus

We reduced airborne pollutants through environmental regulation, not offshoring. Power generation and transportation are responsible for >90% of air pollution. I certainly do not consider us responsible for China's inability and/or unwillingness to enact environmental protections (that's not to say that I'm a fan of offshoring). Let's not forget that there are over a billion Chinese. Not everything they do is because of us.

if you are wearing jeans and looking at a computer, you are part of the prolem.

well, I'm not wearing jeans...

Wonderful. Now I'm going to have that image burned into my mind.



Tom

There are no more textile/fabric manufacturers in the U.S. nor are there any TV manufacturers, washing machine, refrigeraters etc. I have a roll of teflon tape from the early 1980's made in Cleavland. Not any more. We don't have any choices. I'm surprised the Nissan Leaf is eventually going to be made in the U.S. ... at least partly. I'm guessing Nissan realized that if we import all our manufactured stuff ... and import most of our oil to run our stuff, we won't have any income to buy it. So eventually, maybe out of pity, the world's manufacturers will throw us a bone ... before our 3rd world status re-appears.

.

actually, it was a commentary on two pieces done by 60 minutes on pollution in china. one was computer recycling. old computers shipped from our recycling centers to china where they strip them down and pollute all the soil and water for miles around. the other was where all the bluejeans are made now. bluejeans are actually white fabric dyed blue. the dye has polluted a river where an entire city gets it's food from. then, there was the story the guy at my local recycling center told me. i asked him what happened to all the 1-7 plastics. he said they were eventually shipped to china where they are 'reprocessed' and used to make products shipped back to the states.

The actual eventually determines where majority of potential pollution happens. Before going back to China, in order to keep shipping costs down, the density of the plastics need to be increased. This could simply mean shredding it up, or processing it back into pellets for molders.

I came across this today...

Can China's Great Green Wall Help Slow Climate Change?

This might help to answer the original question.

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita]List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Because China has such a high population, the actual pollution from Carbon per person (I don't include other pollutants here) is very low--well at the moment anyway.

the carbon footprint for Americans is high probably due to the weather. Americans have lots of air-conditioning. You only need to go to Vegas to see how much energy is used in keeping cool. Doors are left open letting the freezing cold air escape.
Air-conditioning seems to be on 24-7. And the type of air-conditioning used is not particularly efficient.

Like wise more Americans fly more than most and have big fuel inefficient cars. I think the Humvee does 3 to the gallon.

The USA certainly has the technology and knowhow to change. We have lots of Fords in the UK which have very good efficient engines. Every time I visit the US, there seem to be more and more of these compared go the massive gas guzzling Lincolns and Buicks.

China seems to be catching up rapidly though.

I think now that the USA has Obama as president, he is beginning to look at reducing carbon emissions by new legislation. Buildings wil become far more energy efficient, better insulated and require less air-conditioning.

nice link.

and a good example of neighsayers having their 2 cents worth.

no matter what the situation, unless its a "110 % solution" they will shoot it down. i think its a great idea and no it will not fix everything, but IT WILL help.

there is no one solution now and their never will be one. going 100% electric in personal transportation is not a 100 % solution either but it will help on so many different levels

Unfortunately, the American attitude of "Can Do" has become an attitude of "Can't Do." Everything is just too expensive. If we stick our heads in the sand, there will be no AGW.