Asian "Brown Cloud" Accounts for much of Global Warming

Disclaimer: I've never been to Europe
but: It seems like when ever I watch sporting events or travel programs on tv, from places like Greece, Turkey or other places on the east end of the Mediterranean Sea the air looks so brown and thick I have to wonder how that extreme air pollution plays into global warming, both by trapping GW gasses as well as by the brown color being able act like a heat sink. Same thing with the OP and Asia.

 

Well, if it's true it's actually good news because this kind of pollution is easier to solve than CO2 emissions. We've just got to encourage Asia to do it. As the Indian and Chinese economies grow and the average Joe starts earning more, there's going to be more demand for cleaner air. This is already a big deal in China where productivity is being lost because of pollution related sick days.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Aug 7 2007, 11:00 AM) [snapback]491849[/snapback]</div>

Agreed - we should be using any means possible to influence them to not pollute, whether it be economic, technical, whatever. Many third world countries will say to us "The U.S. built their economy during the Industrial revolution and didn't care about pollution, so who are you to tell us not to". They have a point, but that horse has left the barn and we can't get it back. Better to try and change the future instead of arguing about the past.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05_SilverPri @ Aug 7 2007, 11:33 AM) [snapback]491871[/snapback]</div>

Seriously? You think we'll be effective at influencing these other countries at the very same time that we continue to be a main emitter concerning green house gases? The horse has left the barn, but we can do a great deal to clean up our act before imposing our will on other countries.

The best thing we can do for the globe and for our economy is to engage in the development of alternative energy means so that these mechanisms become cheaper and mass produced, allowing these other countries to afford and implement them.

 

All in all, this is rather alarming, as aerosol particles had been assumed to have a cooling effect. You can read the entire source article (only about 1 page) at Nature . The article makes no sort of conclusion regarding the efficacy of limiting CO2 vs. pollution, but simply states:
These findings2 might seem to contradict the
general notion of aerosol particles as cooling
agents in the global climate system, but they
also emphasize the importance of resolving
how aerosol radiative forcing varies with altitude.
Here's hoping the budget for the Glory Mission satellite that could help resolve this question doesn't get cut again, as it has in the past.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SSimon @ Aug 7 2007, 11:05 AM) [snapback]491890[/snapback]</div>

GHG emissions and other pollution are not the same. Related, yes, but not the same. Have you seen pictures of the air in large cities in China? It's absolutely horrific. Several times worse than the dirtiest cities in the US. They shouldn't need any encouragement from us, christ, it's amazing that people there can function at all. China could do loads by simply cleaning up it's air using pollution control technology that's 20 years old. Same for India. That's where there's room for optimism here. It's not rocket science. This stuff should be pretty easy to implement and there's an excellent economic case (which includes public health) for doing it. This is a case where the whinging about the past can be met with "we've already developed the technology and you're benefiting from our RD, so use it and start breathing".

The other up side to this is that the results will arrive quickly, unlike GHGs where the reaction to change is considerably slower.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Aug 7 2007, 03:09 PM) [snapback]491992[/snapback]</div>

Pollutants are pollutants. They just amend our environment in different ways. I guess I just have a problem with the hypocrisy of it all. The US population thriving off of our wealth while made on the back of polluting industry, buying our huge gas guzzlers and setting up our living quarters in a frickin' house that 10 Chinese families could probably reside in rather comfortably...all the while pointing our finger our finger at them. It makes us all the more disgusting as a populace.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SSimon @ Aug 7 2007, 01:36 PM) [snapback]492022[/snapback]</div>

Well if letting erveryone else repeat our mistakes and learning nothing from them is what you are espousing, I'd really have to question whether you care about eenvironment or just hate America!

Trying to keep others from making them same errors can be construde as hypocisy, or you could cal a spade a spade (and hoe that has been flattended) and admit pollution is just as bad (and soon will be wrse) from the developing countries.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Devil's Advocate @ Aug 7 2007, 04:07 PM) [snapback]492046[/snapback]</div>

Trouble is, we haven't yet learned from our mistakes. We're continually repeating the same mistakes over and over again - destruction of wetlands, contamination of watersheds, irresponsible development planning, so how are we to teach other countries how to best care for their respective environment? I recognize the consequences if developing countries mirror our development as it relates to our environment. That is the exact reason that I disagree that we should dictate environmental responsibility and stewardship to the rest of the globe.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SSimon @ Aug 7 2007, 04:39 PM) [snapback]492063[/snapback]</div>

Solving this problem is not easy. The earth is such a compicated entity and there are sooooo many variables. But please do not point at the U.S. (or anyone else) and say "they are bad, so we can be bad too."

Don't justify one bad (China causing polution, for example) by pointing to another bad.

 

We've made, and continue to make, enormous economic and personal gains at the expense of the environment. I don't find it logical for us to ask other countries to extend sacrifices at the expense of their own economic and personal advancement in consideration of the environment, while we continue managing our lives without any such sacrifices.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mikeg @ Aug 7 2007, 04:24 PM) [snapback]492109[/snapback]</div>

He didn't try to.

 

Write a letter to China and India by all means but while you wait for that to have an affect do what you can to reduce your environmental footprint. Your environmental footprint is way bigger than the average Asian environmental footprint so while you apply pressure to Asia maybe you can ease your pressure on the environment. I don't care where you're from.

Think globally, act locally.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SSimon @ Aug 7 2007, 03:36 PM) [snapback]492022[/snapback]</div>

You may think of us as disgusting, but I don't. You should see someone about that. As for other countries polluting, it really is in their own interest to not pollute for a variety of reason's (health, long term costs, etc.) They should do this regardless of what we have or haven't done in the past. Do you think the advise from a recovered drug addict to not follow in his footsteps is invalid because he himself did it? Maybe it is hypocritical for the U.S. to try to keep people from making the same mistakes, but so what? Aren't the results more important than appearing to be hypocritical? Or another way of saying it, letting experience be our teacher?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05_SilverPri @ Aug 8 2007, 10:21 AM) [snapback]492402[/snapback]</div>

Yes, it appears that they'll have to experience the ill acts afforded to the environment of their own accord...just as we continue to do. We continue to destroy ecosystems, pollute our water and air and then spend billions of dollars to rectify these consequences down the road. Then we do it all over again.

Your argument about a recovering drug addict is not parallel to my statements. Your drug addict recovered. So yes, I'd feel that he'd be a very good source of information about ceasing this behavior. If the drug addict continued to use drugs while espousing to me the value of termination, I'd tell him to go pound sand.

Hypocrisy is not a logical platform for change and progress. If we are going to assume the role of dictating to other countries how they're to conduct their environmental stewardship, we better be engaging in a like manner ourselves. Otherwise the message is void of substance.

 

SSimon,

It would be a not insignificant victory for the environment if we could just get China and India to implement the same pollution controls that we've had here for 25 years! That's all I'm proposing. Your points about our hypocrisy are well taken, but I've never suggested that China/India must become 0 emissions. If they would just scrub their coal plant emissions that would be a huge first step! China is a lot like us. But far scarier because they're 4 times as big and growing faster than we ever did. They're going to have to change out of necessity, not because we're whinging about it. They can't keep going down the path they're on. If they do, China will be a wasteland in 30 years. It won't have 1.4 billion people either.

 

I'm very aware of these increasing population demands and how they relate to our overall environment. I'm not anxiously awaiting the consequences. And I don't have a problem with what you're proposing, so long as it doesn't affect their economy and personal gain from prospering as have we. If this can be achieved through an import of knowledge fine, but the US using it's strength and throwing it's weight around is a bunch of bull. It's only through our unchecked growth, coupled with the magnitude of accompanying environmental infractions, that we've been afforded this strength. How ironic to impose our strength, acquired in such a manner, to other developing countries thereby stifling or hindering their economic prosperity? It wouldn't be just or equitable.

 

The Chinese economy is growing faster than any economy in history. Between 8-10% a year. They can afford "developed" nation pollution standards. The productivity gains (from recovered sick days) alone ought to pay for it. China today is a lot like Pittsburgh was in the 40's except a helluva lot worse because it's a country of 1.3(or 4) billion! What would be interesting to know is if US pollution was showing up on Europe's shores back then (or even now).

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Aug 8 2007, 12:50 PM) [snapback]492578[/snapback]</div>

All of this is true. It is, however, difficult or impossible to enforce standards on another sovereign nation, especially when US companies continue to use Chinese manufacturing for everything under the sun. The problem with your argument is when it gets used as an excuse for why the US can't be held responsible. The classic example is the Bush administration's position on Kyoto. We need to push ahead as fast as we can - build the technology and infrastructure to handle polution. We can always make money selling it to them later, when they figure out it's needed.<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Aug 8 2007, 12:50 PM) [snapback]492578[/snapback]</div>

Well, I can't speak to Europe, but there is always the example of the acid rain falling on Eastern Canada in the early 1980s....