1 
Offline
And welcome to China while the Olympic Game~
Forum
Off Topic Welcome to China~
Welcome to China~
33 repliesAnd welcome to China while the Olympic Game~
Thank you~My home is not far away from Qingdao~
China is the NO.1
No one think Beijing have air polution after they came to China....
All western countries complain about the bad air and even the sportspeople did, but the Chinese government doesn't do anything (at least anything effective) to prevent smog during the Olympic games.
And by the way: China emits the most CO2 of all nations, thus being the greatest contributor to global warming.
edited 1×, last 11.08.08 05:18:05 pm
But what can I watch from the TV is just the sportspeople speak highly of Beijing.....
Maybe you are right~
At least I can't agree with you more....
Also, for those of you who believe that Beijing is just a big smog city, I seriously challenge you to look back in history to whatever country you are in and tell me what it is like if all of the industrial sectors were wiped out when your country was dependent on 3rd tier output and gradually moving onto 4th tier. If you would still like to complain about the air quality in China then I suggest you throw away all of your electronics, go to an uninhabited Island, and live there in isolation. Unless you are willing to do that, you have absolutely no right to complain about the air quality in other nations.
Quote
All western countries complain about the bad air and even the sportspeople did, but the Chinese government doesn't do anything (at least anything effective) to prevent smog during the Olympic games.
Of course, it's also very convenient to leave out the fact that the western countries themselves are the ones who are dependent on products which emits the most Carbon.
Please tell me how are you going to clear up smog? Do you want us to build a gigantic vacuum? Maybe just stop all industry for 16 days? Why not cancel the Olympics itself? Seeing as the electricity used to power it is substantially higher and must be imported from out of the region, not to mention the increase of traffic...
Statements of problem without even a hint of resolution aren't justifiable points.
humer has written
Why there should be a problem to organise the olympic games when there is air pollution? I mean in athens there is also a high value of air pollution and the olympic games 2004 were a high success. Btw air pollution is not a regional problem but a world problem.
But in China its extrem. You can sometimes really see the Smog.
Quote
And countries which puts environment over industry are purely hypocritical. If you really want to complain about air pollution look at the per-capita emission of Synthesized Carbon compounds rather than the gross emission. You'd be surprised at the results (China being a lot lower then most of the countries)
Well, the governments are not really "hypocritical" on this issue. Although the growth rates in the EU are pretty low compared to China with their 11% growth rate, much money is invested by the states into clean technology like solar and wind energy and even fusion power (these experiments at CERN suck up billions of euros...).
China booms although the energy prices rocket, and they could surely invest much money into clean energy while still increasing the quality of life.
For the "per person" values: Please compare the overall wealth in the country. I suspect that a third or a half of all chinese people "produce" almost no CO2, especially on the rural areas.
Quote
Also, for those of you who believe that Beijing is just a big smog city, I seriously challenge you to look back in history to whatever country you are in and tell me what it is like if all of the industrial sectors were wiped out when your country was dependent on 3rd tier output and gradually moving onto 4th tier.
What do you mean with "3rd tier" and "4th tier"?
As far as I understand this seems as if you wanted to explain conditions like in Germany from 1950-1960, where the nation boomed and the people got wealthy
Quote
Please tell me how are you going to clear up smog? Do you want us to build a gigantic vacuum? Maybe just stop all industry for 16 days? Why not cancel the Olympics itself? Seeing as the electricity used to power it is substantially higher and must be imported from out of the region, not to mention the increase of traffic...
The government should have acted earlier. It's not that the Olympics need to be clean, but the Chinese government is in fact killing the attempts to stop Global Warming. It's not our fault that we don't have so many people like China. Having a sixth of the world population, China has a great responsibility and they should act accordingly!
While the other states need to get their plans approved by many instances to act as a unity and have an effect which is comparable to China's, the Chinese government can take actions almost immediately and I wonder why they haven't begun yet.
edited 4×, last 11.08.08 06:58:48 pm
Quote
China booms although the energy prices rocket, and they could surely invest much money into clean energy while still increasing the quality of life.
Many people would surly contend this overview. Currently, going Green just isn't one of China's top priorities, nor is it for many other countries in the world.
Quote
For the "per person" values: Please compare the overall wealth in the country. I suspect that a third or a half of all chinese people "produce" almost no CO2, especially on the rural areas.
Wealth disparity shouldn't impact this point much. As the West continues to assert, Economic ranking should be evaluated on a per-capita fashion, regardless of the social disparity found in the country, so why shouldn't this be evaluated as such? I mean after, the only reason that people still consider China to be poor is because of the per-capita income, and this is mainly due to the large disparity between the income in urban areas and rural (Although the Rural areas are catching up at a significant rate)
Quote
What do you mean with "3rd tier" and "4th tier"?
As far as I understand this seems as if you wanted to explain conditions like in Germany from 1950-1960, where the nation boomed and the people got wealthy
As far as I understand this seems as if you wanted to explain conditions like in Germany from 1950-1960, where the nation boomed and the people got wealthy
3rd tier is extensive output manufacturing and refining of products, 4th tier is service oriented.
Also we can't really use the conditions in Germany from 1950 to 1960 because as far as I'm concerned, half of Germany was starving while the other half was slowly building up its economy under some rather strict limitations. Germany's boom was in the 30's and the 40's and then in the 90's to present, however it was no-where near the boom experienced by China today. Remember, the industrial output of U.S. and Soviet combined significantly deterred German's Blitzkrieg tactics and after there on its economy faltered until the end of the war.
Quote
The government should have acted earlier. It's not that the Olympics need to be clean, but the Chinese government is in fact killing the attempts to stop Global Warming. It's not our fault that we don't have so many people like China. China has a responsibility for a sixth of the world population and they should act accordingly!
While the other states need to get their plans approved by many instances, to act as an unity and have an effect which is comparable to China's, the Chinese government can take actions almost immediately and I wonder why they haven't begun yet.
While the other states need to get their plans approved by many instances, to act as an unity and have an effect which is comparable to China's, the Chinese government can take actions almost immediately and I wonder why they haven't begun yet.
Because China has responsibility for a sixth of the world population does not necessarily mean that we should forfeit our sovereignty. No China has not signed the Kyoto Protocol, No we will probably never, the reason is the same as those given by the United States. Going green really is not our priority, and we will not let other nations or organizations decide our priorities for us.
edited 1×, last 11.08.08 07:03:48 pm
Dicker has written
And by the way: China emits the most CO2 of all nations, thus being the greatest contributor to global warming.
Most of the CO2 emitions come from forest fires, volcanos and decaying organisms. All the factories, cars and such only generate 3% of the worlds CO2 emitions. Plus the global temprature shifts are much closer to solar activity then the usage of fossil fules.
Quote
Also we can't really use the conditions in Germany from 1950 to 1960 because as far as I'm concerned, half of Germany was starving while the other half was slowly building up its economy under some rather strict limitations. Germany's boom was in the 30's and the 40's and then in the 90's to present
Eum, there is a difference between 1945 and 1955, you know?
And the boom times have also been from 1924-1929, 1933-1939 (I mean economically, I surely don't want to say that the Nazi Regime was good...), 1950-1960, and I don't see any real boom since then, just times of slightly better economy...
Quote
Because China has responsibility for a sixth of the world population does not necessarily mean that we should forfeit our sovereignty. No China has not signed the Kyoto Protocol, No we will probably never, the reason is the same as those given by the United States. Going green really is not our priority, and we will not let other nations or organizations decide our priorities for us.
You say "souvereignity", I say "uncooperativity"
Even Bush wants to protect the environment better (announced on the G8) so what is the great deal about that?
Quote
Most of the CO2 emitions come from forest fires, volcanos and decaying organisms. All the factories, cars and such only generate 3% of the worlds CO2 emitions. Plus the global temprature shifts are much closer to solar activity then the usage of fossil fules.
You have to think in absolute numbers.
3% of more CO2 means Trilions of tons more in the atmosphere. This will increase the avarage temperature by "just" very few degrees, but it will be enogh to cause desertification, a higher water level and changes in local flora and fauna.
And the other 97% alone would be absolutely okay, because the ocean sediments absorb and seal carbon for millions of years in almost the same amount as it is freed.
It's called
carbon cycle for a reason. munx has written
Most of the CO2 emitions come from forest fires, volcanos and decaying organisms. All the factories, cars and such only generate 3% of the worlds CO2 emitions. Plus the global temprature shifts are much closer to solar activity then the usage of fossil fules.
Dicker has written
And by the way: China emits the most CO2 of all nations, thus being the greatest contributor to global warming.
Most of the CO2 emitions come from forest fires, volcanos and decaying organisms. All the factories, cars and such only generate 3% of the worlds CO2 emitions. Plus the global temprature shifts are much closer to solar activity then the usage of fossil fules.
Yes that's right, but most of the forest fires are a result of the global warming which is a result of the rising Co2 emission.
leegao has written
Because China has responsibility for a sixth of the world population does not necessarily mean that we should forfeit our sovereignty. No China has not signed the Kyoto Protocol, No we will probably never, the reason is the same as those given by the United States. Going green really is not our priority, and we will not let other nations or organizations decide our priorities for us.
Sorry but this is just a stupid statement. Okay when china doesn't want to do something against pollution it hasn't but you should know that all these emissions will someday affect on the whole world not only on china. I think when all nations would work together they could solve the problem without havin an economical collapse or so. You can see it in TV that the climate allready has changed and you can also see the results (e.g. Hurricane Katrina, more Hurricanes, forest fires...) and its just a question of time when china will also be threatened by these changes but it could be too late then.
humer has written
Yes that's right, but most of the forest fires are a result of the global warming which is a result of the rising Co2 emission
Our Co2 emitions are NOT whats causing the tempratures to rise, just compare the rising of tempratures and the rising of solar activity. They fit together PERFECTLY.
As for your statement on huricanes and stuff...there is NO proof whatsoever that they are caused by our Co2 emitions.
Also I have to agree with leegao, why should china slow down its economy for something that hasnt been proven or something that they dindnt even sign up for?
Plus this is going a bit off topic...