Alex Wang's Blog: Curbing Pollution

Transparency and China's Recent Pollution Accidents

2009-09-03T20:31:29Z

Let's say information about factory emissions of toxic metals was readily available to the public in Hunan and Shaanxi provinces. Would more than 1,600 children still have been poisoned by lead or cadmium recently? Or would local citizens instead have had the information about health risks in their midst needed to protect themselves or to push the local government and factory officials to take necessary steps to protect the community? Could these pollution problems have been resolved before they reached such a late and devastating stage? Would there have been the sort of unrest seen in recent days?

My colleague HU Yuanqiong (Joan) stated the case in a recent AP article:

"The best way to ensure social stability and the sustainability of the economy is to make information open and allow public participation in monitoring emissions and to have a mechanism between the public and the factories to talk things out and resolve disputes," Hu said.

China's Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) has posted an article (Chinese only) on its official website that raises these issues and advocates for expansion of environmental information as a way to prevent the type of "mending the fence after the sheep are lost" (亡羊补牢) approach to pollution we see today. [We'll post an English translation in the next day or two.] This is very good to see, and we can only hope that recent accidents can serve as an inflection point for serious changes going forward.

Back in the mid-80s, Union Carbide chemical accidents in Bhopal, India (and soon after in West Virginia) drove the creation in the United States of the Toxics Release Inventory - a nationwide toxic emissions inventory that gave unprecedented public access to information about toxic chemicals emissions. One way for China to positively respond to recent pollution accidents would be to establish a much more expansive Chinese open environmental information system, notifying the public of toxic emissions and the health risks they present. Vice Premier LI Keqiang this past week made a pledge to strengthen environmental protection. This would be an important way to get this effort underway.

In this economic downturn, China has been investing heavily in infrastructure - rail, highways and the like - to make China more economically competitive going forward. Think of open environmental information as necessary environmental protection infrastructure, without which the entire environmental protection system breaks down. Yesterday, China's Ministry of Environmental Protection already approved in principle a plan to more aggressively regulation heavy metal pollution. Let's hope that it includes an aggressive push for information infrastructure that will be strengthened in the coming months and years.

Visit Greenlaw! See NRDC's bilingual blog dedicated to discussion of China's environmental law, policy and civil society at http://www.greenlaw.org.cn (Chinese) and http://www.greenlaw.org.cn/enblog (English).

China meets 2008 interim targets for chemical oxygen demand and sulfur dioxide emissions

2009-03-17T11:56:15Z

Michael Zhang in our Beijing office put together the following analysis of recent announcements in China:

At a presentation of the Government Work Report to the NPC and the CPPCC, Premier Wen Jiabao mentioned two figures that environmental analysts in China have been keenly awaiting. Data for the first half of 2008 on chemical oxygen demand (COD), a measure of water pollution, and sulfur dioxide (SO2) was released several months ago. Many experts predicted that the year-end data would arrive in early March.

According to the Premier, COD levels and sulfur dioxide levels were down 4.42 percent and 5.95 percent respectively for 2008. And yesterday the Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) announced 2008 year-end reductions for COD of 6.61% and for sulfur dioxide of 8.95% (both of off 2005 levels). [Editor's Note: By our calculations these two announcements are not consistent with each other. We're running the numbers now and will have more to come.]

So how does this stack up against China's own goals? The 11th Five-Year plan sets a target of 10% reduction in both COD and SO2 levels from 2005 figures by 2010. Last February, Zhou Shengxian, the head of the Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP), also announced interim targets for 2008: a 5 percent decrease for COD and a 6 percent decrease for SO2 from 2005 baseline figures by the end of 2008. So, if the numbers are correct, it looks as if China has hit its 2008 interim targets for COD and SO2.

The dramatic reductions in energy use and in production generally in 4th quarter 2008 would have contributed significantly to the 2008 reductions in both of these metrics.

See our bilingual (English and Chinese) blog dedicated to discussion of China's environmental law, policy and the power of the people at http://www.greenlaw.org.cn.

China and the US: Sticking to a truly "green" stimulus

2009-01-29T02:53:29Z

Barbara Finamore and I had an article in the China Daily last week concerning pledges of “green stimulus” in China and the U.S. It has been a bad air week in Beijing with the API hitting a smoggy 131 (Grade 3A) yesterday. It's a strong reminder that the temporary measures during the Beijing Olympics are not enough. Swift action (including green economic stimulus; a fundamental shift to a focus on enforcement and deterrence; greater transparency; expanded avenues for public enforcemen and supervisiont; and enhanced central government authority on environmental protection) is needed.

This article also appeared in China Dialogue. Please also see our Greenlaw blog devoted to discussion of China's environmental law, policy and the power of the public.

China, US New Year green vows need action

(China Daily)

Updated: 2009-01-19 07:45

January 1 in many parts of the world is a time for new-year resolutions. We reflect on our bad habits and vow to change for the better -- to lose weight, quit smoking or be a better person. With the global economy collapsing around us, both China and the United States recently offered up an early resolution for the coming year: to “go green”.

The proposed economic stimulus packages of both countries include potentially promising “green” components. China disclosed a 4-trillion-yuan (US$585 billion) package that designates at least 350 billion yuan (US$51 billion) for biological conservation and environmental protection. Moreover, China’s Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) has announced that the stimulus will "not be spent in the energy and resource-intensive industries or high-pollution industries" and will benefit the renewable energy and pollution-control industries.

In the United States, new president Barack Obama also has proposed a package that, in part, creates “green jobs” through business incentives for energy alternatives and environmentally friendly technologies.

These eco-focused stimulus packages may seem counter-intuitive to some, but they mark an important shift in thinking from two of the world’s leading superpowers. In addition, they validate what many of us have known for a long time: that environmental protection and economic growth are not incompatible, as some naysayers have argued.

Given the accelerating trends towards a low-carbon economy, green innovation may well be the key to economic competitiveness in the 21st century. Just compare the fortunes of Toyota and the US automakers. Toyota and its enormously successful hybrid Prius epitomise the potential in green innovation. The nearly bankrupt US automakers – which, time and again, scuttled more efficient cars in favour of petrol-hungry vehicles -- represent what happens when the opportunities for green innovation are ignored in favour of the old ways of doing business.

Green innovation not only strengthens economic competitiveness but also creates green jobs. The US Conference of Mayors estimates that some 750,000 people currently hold green jobs in the United States. An analysis by the United Nations Environmental Programme projects that a major shift to clean-energy investments could create up to 20 million new jobs worldwide by 2030. The potential for green jobs in both countries is tremendous and relatively untapped.

The foundations of an economic model based on green innovation require a robust investment in energy efficiency, green buildings, public transit, advanced pollution-control technologies and renewable energy. Studies, like a 2007 McKinsey study on energy productivity, show that these kinds of investment make good economic sense. In both nations, but in China in particular, this new paradigm also will require heavy investment in effective environmental enforcement.

These investments will include accurate environmental monitoring and reporting, well-trained environmental regulators and enforcement officials, public supervision and greater transparency. China has made a good start in this regard by proposing to enhance public participation and transparency in the process of spending the stimulus funds, and such efforts need to be sustained over the long-term.

In fact, the potential for green innovation in China’s economic stimulus package far exceeds what has explicitly been announced, but only if China sets criteria to improve environmental performance for all the investments in the package. For example, China could develop criteria to ensure that the 280 billion yuan (US$41 billion) proposed for housing projects is spent only on green buildings that save water and energy and are located using smart growth principles.

The 1.8 trillion yuan (US$263 billion) proposed for transportation and the power grid should focus on public transit rather than highways, and should ensure that transmission lines are located in areas that will enable China to tap its abundant renewable energy resources. And research-and-development and innovation projects should focus on clean energy, advanced transportation and technologies to improve energy and water efficiency. The stimulus package also could include funding for a comprehensive program of skills development and worker placement to train unemployed people for green jobs, such as industrial-energy auditors and building-energy code inspectors.

Details of the US package still have not been announced, but similar efforts should be made to incorporate green innovation into all aspects of that package. For example, our organisation, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and others have proposed a more than US$30 billion energy savings plan that includes energy efficiency retrofits; construction of an improved electricity grid; strengthened energy efficiency standards; policy reforms; training; and more efficient power plants.

New-year resolutions are notoriously hard to keep, though. Like a resolution to quit smoking that does not last past the first month of the year, there are some worrisome signs that the pledges for a green stimulus will not make it into 2009. With tough economic times ahead, there will be pressure on many fronts to cast aside environmental innovation. Some have reported that environmental-impact assessments in China are being hurried through for investments such as coal-fired power plants, in response to the global economic slowdown.

Despite the Ministry of Environmental Protection’s announcement to avoid investment in energy and resource-intensive industries, China’s National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) recently announced that the stimulus for nine industries includes support for energy and resource-intensive industries such as steel, automobiles and petrochemicals (though some reports suggest that investment dollars here will be channelled towards clean production and renewable technologies).

In the United States, there already is concern that various interest groups are lobbying hard to divert funds away from green projects. In the face of calls for increased environmental protection, powerful interest groups have always lined up in opposition, claiming that these policies would lead to bankruptcy and economic devastation. The urge to buy into these arguments tends to grow stronger in times of economic difficulty. However, to do so would be a terrible mistake.

Time and again industry has responded with innovation, and the economy and the environment have benefited. Some examples of this include the invention of the catalytic converter in response to stricter car-emissions regulations, and ever-more-efficient home appliances in response to stronger energy efficiency standards.

In the end, blatant self-interest is perhaps the biggest reason that the pledges for a green stimulus could be more durable than your typical new-year resolution. Many government, business and labour group leaders have come to recognise that “going green” also can be good for the economy, employment and the bottom line. If leaders of both China and the United States can stand up to the inevitable opposition from some entrenched interest groups to invest in a green economy, history indicates that both the economy and the environment will be the better for it.

So this year, as we slowly forget our pledges to lose weight, exercise more and be better people, let us hope that China and the United States, for their own sakes and ours, keep to their pledges to “go green”.

What a difference a day makes...

2007-11-26T17:33:08Z

It's a beautiful day in Beijing today, which made me think about this picture someone sent me a few months ago:

This is a photo of Beijing on two consecutive days about a year ago in 2006. This, in a single picture, crystallizes for me why we are working in China. The enormity of the problem on one side. The overwhelming promise and potential on the other.

Many days over this gritty city are like those days you see on the left. Those are days when you stay inside and turn your air purifier up to 11. But, sometimes – particularly when a strong wind blows through or after a heavy rain – we get a perfect day like you see towards the right, an instant reminder of what is possible.

There is a tremendous amount of environmental protection activity to take us to the cleaner side of this picture, coming from many different sectors of Chinese society – government, community groups, lawyers, environmental groups, scientists, doctors, etc. More needs to be done though. We have been working to help implement a number of key solutions (in the areas of greater public involvement in environmental protection, improved access to environmental information, energy efficiency and green buildings, clean energy technologies, and so on). I’ll look forward to talking more about these in the weeks to come.

Pollution Reduces China’s Rainfall

2007-11-18T18:01:13Z

Pollution is causing rainfall to decrease in certain parts of China. A little noticed study published in Science earlier this year, somewhat opaquely entitled “Inverse Relations between Amounts of Air Pollution and Orographic Precipitation,” found that average precipitation in a particular mountain region in central China had fallen by 20 percent over the past 50 years. The authors of the study showed that increasing concentrations of fine, airborne pollutants were responsible for decreasing average precipitation in mountain regions.

“These findings highlight the threat to vital water resources in polluted regions of the world where hilly-area precipitation makes a significant contribution to the regional water supply, as in the southwestern U.S. central and northern China, and the Middle East.”

Figure: Trends of annual precipitation amounts and Ro between Mt. Hua and the plain stations of (A) Xi'an and (B) Huayin.

In past years, the conventional wisdom was that environmental protection, while desirable, was a luxury that a still developing China could not always afford. This study is part of the increasingly overwhelming body of evidence that environmental pollution actually hurts China’s economic development. Development that harms a region’s ability to renew its own water supply is not sustainable development. Many terrific experts within China have been pounding this drum in recent years.

The BBC ran an article on this a few months ago.

Little Stiletto Heels and China’s Environment

2007-11-06T13:56:54Z

It’s no secret that the products that fuel our daily consumer lives in the U.S. are now overwhelmingly produced in China. Try living a year without buying anything “Made in China” and see how you like it (one woman seems to have done just that and wrote a book about it – in short, it’s doable, but more expensive and an all-around pain).

Less often discussed is the fact that the environmental crisis in China is driven in significant part by the production of goods for our consumption. The resultant pollution in turn is finding its way back to the U.S. A few media articles have made this connection.

A Wall Street Journal article last week noted the following:

A significant portion of China's air pollution can be traced directly to the production of goods that are exported. In the city of Shenzhen, a major industrial base in southern China, about 89% of emissions of sulfur dioxide, an air pollutant that causes acid rain, are released in the process of export manufacturing, according to a recent study published in the U.S.-based Journal of Environmental Science and Technology. The study also found 71% of particulate matter, the small particles that cause smog and respiratory problems, can be traced to the manufacturing of exported goods.

The best piece I have seen on the connection between Chinese pollution and U.S. consumer behavior is Evan Osnos’ award-winning piece in the Chicago Tribune on Chinese cashmere. The article tied insatiable demand in the U.S. for $20 Wal-Mart cashmere sweaters to massive land degradation in northern China where the goats that generate cashmere wool are raised. The dust storms caused by this land degradation have in turn contributed to air pollution over the U.S. Osnos talks about the cycle on the Colbert Report of all places (to paraphrase, “the goats hooves are like little stiletto heels piercing the earth…”). What goes around comes around.

China’s government is using this dynamic to try to address its own environmental problems. China’s State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA) recently announced an initiative with the Ministry of Commerce to clamp down on export manufacturers that violate environmental laws. According to WSJ, “export manufacturers that violate China's pollution laws would be forced to close for one to three years. The policy will be enforced jointly by SEPA and the Ministry of Commerce.”

On its face, this seems like a superfluous move since all enterprises (not just export manufacturers) are subject to environmental laws already. However, the key here is joint SEPA enforcement with the much more powerful Ministry of Commerce. SEPA continues to be one of China’s weakest ministries with only 250 some staffers at the national level to oversee China’s environmental protection, and this represents another in a series of moves by SEPA to maximize its influence within the limits of its fairly significant resource constraints.

Can Beijing Clear the Air in Time for the Olympics?

2007-08-10T10:23:34Z

The hot topic in Beijing this week is whether the murky haze of smog that usually covers the city will be lifted when the world's athletes begin to descend on Beijing in August 2008. This summer certainly hasn't been pretty from an air quality perspective here in Beijing.

Dramatic things are possible though and we may be surprised at what we see come August 2008. One of the key measures Beijing is taking to clean the air is to remove a dramatic number of cars from the roads. There is going to be a trial run of this from August 17-20, when some 1.3 million of Beijing's 3 million motor vehicles will be taken off the road. A smaller scale practice run last fall (a mere 800,000 cars!) during a China-Africa forum showed drastic and virtually immediate reductions in NOx levels of 40 percent. There are some amazing satellite photos and stats on the NASA Observatory site:

Like many things in China, the scale of this endeavor is simply mind-boggling.

Other techniques to clear the air include shutting down factories, holding up the massive amounts of construction going on, and unleashing China's substantial artificial rain-making apparatus in the days before the Games. I've heard that the main concern is forcing clouds to rain themselves out before they hit Beijing so as to avoid a rainy opening ceremony; however, rain almost always whips up winds that blow pollution out of the city for the following day or two. If it helps to remove pollution, I can't imagine that Beijing will not use it in the lead-up to the big show.

So, I'm not too worried about the air during the Beijing Olympics. The real challenge is for China to sustain this long after the Olympics are done and gone. There are a lot of steps that China can take to make this a reality (while continuing to grow and improve economic conditions for the nation's people), but the devil will be in the details of implementation and making sure that leaders have the will to do what it takes. More on this later...