IAP Political Forum

Not content with merely living in foul pollution themselves, the Chinese now think it is fit and proper that they should pollute other countries as well.  Chinese filth is so prevalent, noxious, and voluminous that you can see it from the Earth's orbit.  Beijing, famous for a thick smog that covers the city, has approximately 100 "blue-sky" days per year.  It's no wonder that Olympic athletes refuse to train there and the Chinese government is embarrassed and trying to move athletic venues.

Chinese pollution, rolling rampant over Korea and Japan, now threatens North America as they continue to belch forth their disgusting pollution.

http://geology.com/nasa/monitoring-pollution-by-satellite.shtml

China should clean up its act.  It's shameful enough that their own citizens have to live in that filth, they shouldn't be permitted to pollute clean countries.  China should be responsible for all costs associated with cleaning up its filth and all health problems that result from its failure to do so.

your first thread was trashed please read why, otherwise, we are going to have a problem if you continue to break the rules

Considering the fact China mostly produces for us, the 'West'. We, the 'West' should blame our companies that move industry to China in first place. Just to make it easier for you to understand think of what would happen if Chinese government forces anti-polluting policies within China. You will end up with DVD that costs twice than before, you will cry again, industry will move to Hanalulu and then circulating around the globe.

So if you wish to fight, fight large companies that produce possible pollution and not just China because Chinese like any other normal human at first place want their foods on the table.

 

I ask again: how the hell is China otherwise supposed to develop?  We in the UK had a phase of doing precisely the same thing.  London used to be a disgustingly filthy place in Victorian times.  Just read Dickens.

In time, as China develops, it may well develop environmental technology good not only for them, but for all of us.

Give them time for heaven's sake.  They were tearing each other apart 30 years ago.  They've come a hell of a long way.

Available technology was a little different during "Dickens time".......

Weak.

Yes, this is very reason why UK moved all it's polluting factories to China.

What a terrible response.  If the Chinese are happy to live in filth and pollution, fine.  It's not like they have any freedom to criticize their government and tell them to do otherwise.  The enslaved Chinese population just has to bend over and take it from their government.  If the dictators say:  "We're building a chemical factory right next to your river" there's nothing the people can do to stop it --  despite it being "The People's" government.  Yeah, right.

So ok.  Pollute away, destroy your own environment.  Half of China is already a desert and the Chinese are doing a hell of a job and making their whole country a desert.  Beijing already has sandstorms that paralyze the city.  The point of the thread was that China should at least make efforts to keep its filth and its trash within its own borders, instead of making Korea and Japan, and North America, for that matter, as dirty and disgusting as the Chinese environment.

Japan is an amazingly clean country.  China should follow the Japanese leaders.  Japan sets an excellent example for China to follow.  Japanese technology is decades ahead of Chinese technology; perhaps the Chinese should acquire some of the technology from the Japanese, who manufacture high-quality goods with minimal pollution.

again

Japan is amazingly clean country because it moved all the most polluting factories to China.

Stephen Hero get your facts straight, you act like an ignorant fool.

Wrong.  Japan is clean because it has a government that is responsible to its citizenry.  And those citizens don't stand for the awful pollution that is belched out by the Chinese factories.  The Chinese citizens are essentially prisoners to their government.  They have no power to object or set local standards.  If the Beijing dictators put a power plant next to an elementary school, they can't object.  Further, the Chinese government standards are so low that it's atrocious.  It's not foreign factories that pollute the country, sir.

I have opened two production facilities in China.  Foreign companies are held to a very high standard.  It's your local, domestic state-owned competitors that are free to pollute without concern.

How many production facilities have you opened in China?  Get your facts straight.

Chinese destruction of their environment isn't limited to dumping their pollution into the environment and causing Korea and Japan to be polluted as well.  The Chinese government is so ravenous for resources that it has consumed most of the water causing the Gobi desert to advance towards Beijing, which is now regularly plagues with sandstorms.  Beijing, at least in 2006, only had 56 blue-sky days per year.  Terrible.

http://www.pacificenvironment.org/article.php?id=1461

According to the article, since the sandstorms usually hit in May and June, they are confident that the Olympics in August will be unaffected.  What a joke.

I love the part of the article where, after a 10-day sandstorm, the Communist thugs in government say, "Hm, maybe we should do something..."

Chinese want to produce as cheap as possible. They don't invest money in the environement.
And if Western owned factories polute there, it's the fault of the Chinese governement which allows that.

I'm personaly ready to pay more for stuffs like dvd player (which you buy only once in a while anyway) if it pays for better social and environemental wellbeing of those who did it.

But I already don't buy Chinese products anymore (at least when it's possible), especialy not DVD players.
Now, I always avoid low-end cheap stuffs, hoping that by paying more I won't have to move it back to the garantee service or go buy a new one after the garantee expired.

Fred, you right but the truth is Chinese government has two choices either their ppl starve to death or pollute themselves / us. Chinese government chooses the thing any government would. I expect China will be cleaner in 10 more years. It must be worldwide pressure but never forget we are also to blame for Chinese pollution of the earth.

Please explain how the revised title continues to "break the rules."

I understand why the first title could be interpreted as in violation of the Posting Rules, although that was not my intent.  I quickly and without objection modified the title and reposted with the approval of Ahkenaten.

So I am very curious why another moderator views the revised title as in violation of any rule.  Please advise.

I think he just wants you to know why the first one was trashed, not implying that there's stilll something wrong with the title now.

It's done and over. No biggie. Nothing personal; no one's saying you're the bad guy; it coulda happened to anyone so lets just continue, ok?

Exactly.  Also there's something a bit unfair about westerners expecting China not to develop.  Are they mean to just sit around in mud huts?

30 years ago they had the cultural revolution.  Now even poor Chinese people have electricity, running water, televisions, DVD players.  It's not a third world country any more. They have food on the table.  Are people saying they should have to go back to the poverty of before?

And in time, they will get cleaner, without a doubt.

First of all, if the Communist Chinese dictators decide that they want to pollute and destroy their country, then fine.  I know Chinese citizens don't have a voice, can't vote, can't protest, and can't do anything to stop them.  But I guess that's the consequences of placing dictators in power.

That being said, great, spread your filthy pollution all over China.  Knock yourself out.  Turn you country into a desert.  Spawn new disease. 

However, there's no reason that Korea and Japan should be paying the price for Chinese pollution.  As the satellite images clearly demonstrate, the Chinese are now polluting other countries.  What measures have the dictators taken to prevent that?  Right, nothing.

China is polluted not because it's developing - it's polluted because it's leaders allow it to be.

During the cultural revolution, the Communist dictators murdered millions of Chinese people.  They haven't changed a bit.  They don't have the citizenry's best interest at heart.  Just like any other military dictatorship, the Communists exist to preserve their own power by repressing the political freedoms of the people.  The pollution is simply a natural consequence of such power.

The "development" is slow.  For the first in 2007, the government of China participated in statistical findings by the World Bank.  The estimates of the Chinese economy have been greatly exaggerated.  When the World Bank benchmarked the Chinese economy against other nations according to its survey, the Chinese economy had to be reduced by 40% from previous estimates.  It remains at below 10% of the USA's per capita GDP.  The per capita income in China is $2,060 -- placing it in between the economic powerhouses of Swaziland and Angola.  Congratulations on climbing above Angola.  The US, by comparison, is right at $45,000.  Twenty times richer.

Feel free to "develop" all you want.  Beijing had 56 blue-sky days -- down from 100 two years before.  It's getting worse.  And now you're polluting other countries too.

Why does Japan have to suffer from the stench of Chinese pollution?  Why do they have to pay that price?  If you're happy with sandstorms and turning your country into a desert, go for it.  Don't make that choice for other countries.  Oh wait, it's a Communist regime.  They don't give a damn.

I wouldn't say or want that I would simply point out that while the CCP needs people to believe that it's because of them that China enjoys any prosperity -- or for that matter freedom from the "shackles of Western blah blah blah" ---  that this is false. China could have this with or without the Party.

China could be a "economical powerhouse", people could all have a chicken in the pot, a beer in the fridge and their favorite tv show about to start with or without the Party; with or without Tibet; with or without crushing any vocal opposition or jailing dissidents;

I mean the logic here is similar to: "Oh I know Western life is pretty good but we can almost have that too thanks to the Party and freedoms you can't have and need to pretend you don't want".

I mean we can do it why not China? The only enemy here is the Party mentality. Not China and not the West. The only one who needs to feel insecure about their future is the Party -- not the West and not Chinese. No one's saying they have to be "like Us" either -- that would be the Party talking again.

My point in a nutshell is having "electricity, running water, televisions, DVD players" is not thanks to the Party. Communisim and the Party did not bring you these, in fact they HAVE to give you those things or they won't survive. That's real socialism for you: the almost mathimatical social physics that state if the people arent getting what they want they will revolt.



Ahk

They would also have pollution with or without the party.  The question is unrelated to whether or not they are a democracy.  Development involves pollution, sadly.

Have any of you been to India? India is a democracy yet has equally as bad pollution, and its democracy has also done the square root of fanny adams for the many millions of indians trapped in hideous shanty towns, which even poor chinese would be aghast at.

So, then, why is it that in India, many people live in wretched slums?  In Bangkok, you can see shanty towns and slums from the train as you leave the city.  Feck, even in Europe (Bulgaria, from one report I recently saw) there are conditions that look shitty compared with China.

Look at indonesia, a former client state of the USA, whose dictator Soeharto was supported by the US for a long time, kids eating their breakfast off the railway track etc - you just don't find that in China.

Seriously, when I came to China, I was expecting this 'police state' and was surprised by how different it was from my image. 

This is false.  It really doesn't.  Studies have shown that it is the economic policy of the Chinese dictators that they lower environmental standards to encourage unsafe, unhealth manufacturing.  Thus, the Chinese produce sub-standard quality goods that poison the rest of the world.  You are mistaken to assume that the level of Chinese pollution and filth is a normal result of industrialization.  It is not.  It is the result of poor planning by the central government bureaucrats.


After being in China, there's no hovel, shack, mudhouse, or cave that make poor Chinese aghast.  They're pretty much at the bottom.

Wellllll....I disagree. The only reason the West isn't producing the same is because the people dont like it. Companies didnt spend millions and billions on R&D/production of the vast number of anti-pollution devices and methodologies because they didnt have anything better to do with the money. They were forced to -- sure by the government -- but by a government that needed to listen to the will of the people before they could get elected.

I'm not saying Communism = pollution, that's not my position -- but I would point out that if you (the people) didnt like it there's not much you could do about it and I will give the following equation:

pollution = some money now with no future.

And the Party is all about the short term future because that's all they've got. They need to give you what you want and tehy can't deal with restrictions on getting it, so if that means full out production and screw the pollution concerns then so be it.

I havent really been active on this thread at all besides responding specifically to what you said about owning tv's and dvd players. I'm not interested in hammering on China about pollution. I don't like it but I know why they're doing it.


I know -- except as I pointed out, that if you don't like it there's sweet ****-all you can do about it :) 


I am well aware of India's pollution; when i look at those photo's from orbit I believe we're looking at some of India's pollution. I know they are one of the worst. Wasn't my point. My point was that you don't have a dvd player because of the Party or because you observe little or no pollution restrictions. I would point out that India is still developing with a much lower GDP ($5300 per cap vs India's$2700) and population density about twice yours. Meaning in short they are "more" developing than China with more urban area.

Am I "down on India" for this? Sure. Every bit as much as I am with China, which for me personally isn't much.


Ahk

Read a newspaper.  Not a censored one like they have in China.  Not on the internet where the Chinese central government filters it.   Open your eyes.  The Chinese are brutal, thuggish dictators that repress their people into blind submission.  The only reason the Chinese people take it is because whenever they rise up against the government, such as at Tianament, they slaughtered by the hundreds or thousands.

But right, that's ok.  It's just democracy protestors.  They don't deserve to live.  Neither do the Uighurs, the Tibetans, or anyone else that challenges the governments chokehold on the populations.  They should all be summarily executed.

Students who dared to speak out...

(http://www.cnd.org/HYPLAN/yawei/june4th/bj10.jpg)

Sorry, that is absolute cack.

My wife has seen shots of shanty towns in India and been in shock at how poor it is.

I don't read the Chinese papers, only western news sites.  And my own eyes, my own life, in China.  I don't see people getting machine-gunned.

Wow.  Get outside of your gated community and take a look around.  Chinese income per capital is below about half of Africa.  What do you think the result of that rampant poverty is, exactly?

(http://lh3.google.com/.../XIHfsLlH2CA/s800/DSC_1633.JPG)

March 2006 - hundreds of Uighurs gunned down, indiscriminately.  Open your eyes.

Like its any different in Africa

You're right - it's about the same economically.  Probably worse in China by a measure because of the Communist economic regimes which chokes out competition.  The level of corruption, disease, poverty and pollution between China and third-world Africa is probably about the same.

So?

I didn't say they had a choice. I just pointed out the reason.
Sure they have to develop and feed their ever-growing population.
India is in the same mess: over one billion of poors and counting...

It takes huge industrial zones built on the spot with minimal requirement just to have power for the machine, fuel for the ovens and a roof to protect the goods (not the workers) from rain.
Wether it's India, China or any other type of regime, a booming, unstopable demographic will always cause issues such as pollution, lack of drinkable water, lack of medical equipement, lack of everything except $2/day workers.

But the Chinese governement has no excuse with the western companies who have the money to afford for cleaner facilities.
Because having a lot of polluting factories will cost them more than they gain in the long/mid term and poeple when they will be sick or disabled due to polution will fall back into poverty and their kids will still play in the mud.

And if their population keep on growing and doesn't decrease, in 20 years they will be 2 billions, and still at the same stage as of today, with the same problems. Had third world countries stop breeding 20 years ago, they would far better off now.
Asia can't add the equivalent of the population of europe every 5 years and expect european living standards at the same time.

Perhaps clean in your own bayckyard first and fix the american problems before bitching about the chinese.

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/each-countrys-share-of-co2-emissions.html

USA is the largest net polluter of CO2, which is in the long term perhaps the most dangerous greenhouse gas emission. Per capita the US pollutes more than 6 times more CO2 than China.

No one's 'bitching about the Chinese'.

The Chinese come here to bitch about Tibet and try and tell us a lot of BS about it. We respond. That's not "Bitching about the Chinese".

And no matter how long you want to keep your head stuffed under that pillow "Europe", it's not just the US. Not by a long shot.



Ahk

Read the title of the thread - not even you can deny that the purpose of this thread is in fact "bitching" about the chinese.

The US has not ratified the Kyoto protocal, whereas all European Union countries have so I don't think you can score any points by attacking Europe on this issue.  The US is not only the largest polluter of CO2 but also the country in the world that acts most irresponsibly, in it's handling of the global warming issue.

I don't think this thread is about Tibet, although  I'll be happy to pick your "arguments" apart on those issues as well - but let's keep that to the Tibet threads.

Read the many threads that prompted this one.


But Canada has ratified it and China has not. Your compulsive need to believe everyone you're speaking to is an American highlights your childish ignorance and the brittleness of your talking points.

please stop dancing around pretending to be educated. it's painfully obvious that you're not.



Ahk

Hah you are really a piece of work, Ahk ...

China ratified the Kyoto protocol 30/08/02. Please stop dancing around pretending to be educated. it's painfully obvious that you're not.  ;D

http://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/kyoto_protocol/application/pdf/kpstats.pdf

Btw. I read your piece in the Tibet thread - just as much fun as this one. I will redicule you in that thread tommorrow :-)

Btw. Are you suggesting the TS is not american ?

Actually your link says they've approved it, not ratified it. If they have ratified it then admittedly that's news to me. At any rate as I said telling me the "US hasn't ratified the protocol so shut up" is moot.


No I'm suggesting you have some compulsion that forces you to believe anyone against China's occupation in Tibet must be American. Telling me to shut up because "I" havent ratified Kyoto is stupid. That's what I'm suggesting.
You're going to need to learn how to read before you're going to be able to effectively ridicule anyone besides yourself.


Ahk

China ratified 30 August 2002 like I said. Approval and Ratification is essentilly the same thing dumbass.
New link since apperently necessary since you can't think:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Kyoto_Protocol_signatories

This thread seems to suggest that Canadians are as ignorant as Americans when it comes to China.

When you bash china on pollution you are barking up the wrong tree - there are worse culprits close by in the US.

You just got owned again ... rofl ...

China ratified 30 August 2002. Ratification and approval is essentially the same thing.

Another one of your lies - or do you claim ignorance this time ?

ROFL ...

2. Acceptance and Approval

The instruments of "acceptance" or "approval" of a treaty have the same legal effect as ratification and consequently express the consent of a state to be bound by a treaty. In the practice of certain states acceptance and approval have been used instead of ratification when, at a national level, constitutional law does not require the treaty to be ratified by the head of state.

[Arts.2 (1) (b) and 14 (2), Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969]

Not going totally offtopic, but there is a mayor difference between accepting and signing a treaty and ratifying it. The former European constitional treaty got accepted and signed but wasn't ratified.

Now these a different treaties, but there IS a difference.

Nonetheless I do somewhat agree with that the USA has to look at its own backyard before complaining about others. China nonetheless together with the USA are major producers of CO2. Hopefully China ratifies the treaty otherwise they are not obliged to change much.

Well the organization behind the Kyoto protocol considers it Ratified by China:

http://maindb.unfccc.int/public/country.pl?country=CN

Also, the section form the interational treaty states clearly that in this context ratification and acceptance is essentially the same thing, which also explains why the same date is used for the Chinese ratification and acceptance.

*sigh*


the pdf you linked to clearly indicates acceptance not ratified. Then i went on to admit I could've been wrong. I simply pointed it out. S'all I did kid.  If you could read English or weren't sent here by your girlfriend Cune to Troll here you'd understand that.


Calling me a lire for telling you the publication you linked me to clearly says that China accepted the agreement, while others have ratified it is plain stupid. Obviously I'm not lying and if you had the ability to open up the pdf and read it yourself properly you'd see that.



I warned you on the other thread and Im doing it now: since you've already admitted that you only joined here to troll either tone down your childish tantrum and grow up or be removed.

Ahk

I am not here to troll - I am here to spread facts- something which is very, very lacking in many posts on this boards. How did your deranged mind come to that conclusion ?

You claimed that China did not ratify the agreement in the post before the one I posted a link. Thats the reason I posted the link in the first place.

Ergo, you are either a liar or ignorant ... Perhaps it was the former and then I am glad I could educate you a little bit ...

When I stand up against your ignorance you threat to remove me from the board - so much for freedom of speech.  If you want remove me but then you are really making a fool out of yourself - ROFL ...

China is exempt from the Kyoto Protocols.  What the hell difference does it make whether they ratified it or not?  Typical, UN-like thinking.  Let's look at actual results.

America is decreasing its emissions.  Source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/flash/pdf/flash.pdf  


Kyoto signatory countries are INCREASING their emissions, and have done so consistently. Source:  http://www.pacificresearch.org/docLib/20080401_08_Enviro_Index.pdf

So, in the end, countries that SIGNED Kyoto have ICNREASED their greenhouse gas emissions by 21%.
While at the same time, the US has reduced its emissions, but hasn't signed.

And we should sign Kyoto, why, again, exactly?

Ok good. You're welcome here to if you can calm down. My 'deranged mind" didnt come up with it. You said it yourself here...

http://www.itsallpolitics.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,26/topic,1953.msg54682/topicseen,1/#msg54682

...and since I know how to, you know, read I can plainly see what you said. ::)


The sequence of events is such:

- I claimed they didnt ratify the agreement.
- you posted a pdf that shows they approved it. I simply pointed that detail out. I admitted on that very post that if they have ratified it that it would be news to me. So what? Why does that anger you so much? lol.
- then you claim I'm lying about that detail when Im not. It's plainly there.



Keep telling yourself that. Fact is we have more educated members here like pengy who can manage to show their points arguing the "Chinese side" without being a troll. A sure sign of a troll is when you admit they have a point or you were wrong about a detail and they prance around like you've "admitted" something and they "owned" you ...lol!

You haven't "stood up" to jack shit. You don't listen to anyone. You've just sat there mouthing off and picking fights. But as you said that's the whole reason you're here. We don't need it. Grow up and stay or remain childish and leave.



Ahk

China is exempt from the Kyoto Protocols.  What difference does it make to the Chinese?

Since its execution, the Kyoto signatories have increased their greenhouse gas emissions by 21%
Since its rejection, the US has reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by almost 4%.

Why should we sign Kyoto again?  Because it doesn't work?

Read your own post number 33, dumbass ...

What has the economic growth been in China since 2002 ?

What has the economic growth been in the US ?

What is the per capita emission of the US ?

What is the per-capita emission of China ?

Why do you think China is exempt and the US not ?

Hint-> The US emits 5-6 times more CO2 per capita than China ...

The only reasons it wouldn't work is that some countries do not take their responsibility towards the life of the planet, and China is not one of those countries ....

What difference would that make?

I said you sound a lot like Cune;  your compulsive need to flame and attack was similar to his and your appearance comes right after he was banned.

You plainly said this:

..(ridiculing, btw). So you admit you're just here to troll. Gotcha. That and you can't post a single sentence without a pointless insult. Not one.


Ahk

So now you start crying for momma about being insulted - remembet that you were the one who started it ?

ROFL

This is your first post here:


An obvious Troll. It all starts from there. lol. And I don't "cry to momma". I am Momma.



Ahk

Who's your Daddy?

lol.

I was thinking more like 'mother' from Alien, but whatever works.

Kyoto is an utter failure.  The signatories aren't meeting their targets.  Why should the US sign on again?  Austria had a target of -13% emissions.  It is at +16.5%.  The list of failures goes on:  the UK, Spain, France, Germany, Belgium, Italy.  All failed.  In fact, not only did they fail on reducing their emissions to their agreed upon levels, most of them acutally *increased* their emissions from the benchmark 1990 levels. 

It would comical if it weren't so pathetic.  Japan fails as well, but credit them as at least they're trying to puchase credits to come in on task.

Why in the world would the US commit to a regime that is a failure?   Well, we did sign on the UN and that has been an abject and utter failure, so maybe there is precedent for it.  If the signatories can't live up to their own promises, then they are hypocrites for urging the US to sign on as well.


Ha!  Thanks for the laugh.

(http://www.evworld.com/images/china_river_plastic.jpg)

Link?

I doubt that Europe (the region, not the poster) has increased its CO2 since.

Anyway, ratifying, signing, agreeing etc are moral engagements. What is important is what they do for real.

In the US they plan to build HUGE coal power plants (without CO2 caption devices).
That gives you an idee of what they think of atmospheric pollution...

Would you believe a report from Europe's own Environmental Agency? 



"EU greenhouse gas emissions increase for second year in a row"

There are hundreds of sources.  I'm having a hard time getting by the spam filter.

SH's reply.....damn spam filter......

Sorry Fred, I'm having a hard time with the spam filter on sourcing my material.  I don't expect you to just take my word for it.

Sorry Fred, I'm having a hard time with the spam filter on sourcing my material.  I don't expect you to just take my word for it.

I can't seem to be able to post my links.

As usual your statstistics are utter crap. Now we should be talking hard facts.

Look here (at figure 79):
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/emissions.html

The international Energy Agency projects 1.1 % annual growth compared to 0.3 % growth for Europe.   Add to that that the USA is already one of the worst polluters of CO2 - as we say. 5 times worse than China per capita. In 2004 the US was the worst polluter per capita, although you have now been overtaken by Australia.

The US attitute is that one would expect from a third world country. Before your start bashing the statistics you should perhaps cnotice that it is on a US government website.

Thanks for a good laugh ...

You and americans in general are in no position to lecture any other countries on environmental issues.

You completely miss the point, unsurprisingly.

The point is that the Kyoto Protocols are an abject failure.  The signers of the Protocols have failed consistently and repeatedly to reduce their emissions.  Not only have they failed to reduce their emissions, they are INCREASING.  Another source:  http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/kstrasselpw/?id=110010186&mod=RSS_Opinion_Journal&ojrss=frontpage


You silly Europeans are in no position to lecture responsible Americans about co2 emissions.  We're decreasing ours.  You're increasing yours.  And the EU countries signed Kyoto... hmmm... doesn't seem to be working out that well does it?  Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back.

And its you who miss the point.  You are bitching about the chinese, when the US are even worse culprits. Start cleaning your own backyard, then you can bitch about others.  Sorry, but you are barking up the wrong tree ...

THE EU is doing more than the US, definately.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kyoto36-2005.png

Clearly we see that Kyoto protocol is indeed working.

Right, which is why our emissions are decreasing, and Europe's are increasing.  Nice logic!

Kyoto sure worked wonders.  I'm so glad it cured everything.....

Read again:

Look here (at figure 79):
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/emissions.html

US emmissions increases 4 time as much as the european - and the US has already by far exceed any european country in the per capita emmissions.

These are OECD data posted at a US government site. Your statistics are propagandist bullshit.

Dated info. 

EU emissions have increased in 2006 and forward.


That's as of April 2008.

During the same time, US emissions dropped 1.3%.  Links aren't posting, but they're easy enough to find.

EU emissions are RISING.
US emissions are FALLING.

Your data is out-dated and old.  Recent indiciations contradict your dated info.

Try again.

The link I was posted was published in 2007. There are no more recent global statistics that can be used to compare different countries.

Clear facts shows that the US emissions grows 3-4 times as fast as those of Europe,
and the US keeps on with an attitude to climate change similar to that to be expected from a thirld world country.

Source your statistics. They appear to be pure bullshit.

When it was *published* is not analagous as to the source material for the underlying data.

They *published* old info in 2007.  Wow, do you even read your sources?  Look at the Fig 79 -- it's an estimation out into 2030...

You're quite ridiculous, you know that?

Source your bullshit statistics ...

Here is the one everyone else is using, however it does not look very flattering for the US.
Again the US comes up almost on top as the main polluter and as the worst per-capita polluter.

http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/

At the same time your moronic "President" actively tries to undermine other countries efforts by badmouthing the Kyoto agreement.

The only reason the US didnt ratify Kyoto, was that your administrations is just as selfish, ignorant and evil as you are, dickhead ...

You are really quite redicolous you know ....

And are you really serious about stating month-to-month numbers (that you so far failed to source)
when talking about greenhouse gases - then you are really lacking the very most basic understanding of the climate issues. At least you seems to stand behind your corrupt goverment - rofl:

In recent official statements, Washington has indicated it might be looking for a compromise during negotiations in Bali for a successor agreement to the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012. But sources say the White House is discreetly searching for partners in Beijing and Dehli to derail the prospects for any binding agreements to curb emissions of greenhouse gases.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,521153,00.html

Sleeping with the Enemy, huh ?

Here's the statistic I cited:


Sources are below.  I continue to have a hard time getting by the spam filters.

EPA Publishes Annual National Greenhouse Gas Inventory (http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/109768980ddf452e8525742c005dd608!OpenDocument) dated April 15, 2008.  About a month or so ago.  Let's see what the EPA reported:


EIA Report: U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Declined 1.5% in 2006
 (http://engineers.ihs.com/news/eia-greenhouse-gas.htm).  The report states:


So, as you can see the US emissions are DECLINING.

At the same time, the EU emissions are INCREASING.

From the European Environmental Agency (http://www.eea.europa.eu/pressroom/newsreleases/GHG2006-en):


Do you need more?  It's well documented that European countries, while hypocritically signing the Kyoto Protocols, are INCREASING the emissions of greenhouse gases and FAILING on living up to their commitments.  The US, however, is DECREASING its emissions, while not pledging to do anything it won't live up to.

And we should sign Kyoto, again, why?

By the way, you're really cute when you're angry.

Of course you can draw erroneous conclusions if you focus on just one outlier in the statistics.

US report you linked:
http://engineers.ihs.com/news/eia-greenhouse-gas.htm
Emissions of CO2 from energy consumption and industrial processes, which had risen at an average annual rate of 1.2% per year from 1990 to 2005, declined by 1.8% in 2006. The decline in CO2 emissions from 2005 to 2006 can be attributed to a one-half percent decline in overall energy demand and a decrease in the carbon intensity of electricity generation, said EIA.


You just by chance forgot to mention that the Co2 emmisions have been steady growing with and average 1.2% since 1990. The reduction in energy demand is due to that the banana-republic economy of the US is collapsing and not because of changes in energy policy, dumbass.

The European reports states that the European growth has been an average 0.4 %.

This is completely consistent with the figures I posted before.

Again the US does not only emit 4-5 times CO2 more per capita than the EU, but also has also during the last 15-20 years sported 3 time faster growth.

See, the European energy policy is working and the absence of a us Energy policy is not.

And i'm not angry - I havent had this much fun since reading Ahknatens posts on the "Japanese invasion of Tibet" ....

Energy-policy wise the US is a third world country, give it another year you will also be there economically ... rofl ...

And I haven't had so much fun since you told us the Chinese occupation of Tibet is exactly like the european colonists "occupation" of North America....which is why you believe it's "ok".

According to Europe: North American Natives = Tibetains. North American conquest by Colonists is "bad", but it's exactly like the Cninese occupation of Tibet, which is "good".

Haven't had this much fun since lieexposer was last here crying like a baby.




Ahk

Silly, nonsense of a response.  The fact is that few (any?) of the Kyoto signatory countries have brought down emissions.  In fact, the EU is INCREASING their greenhouse gas emissions despite their commitments, pledges and agreements to make reductions based on the 1990 levels.  The US, on the other hand, without binding itself to Kyoto, has in fact, through its efforts DECREASED its emissions.  That is undeniable, and in fact, you concede that point.  Your only remaining point is based on per capita emissions.  So what?  That's not what I was arguing.  My argument is that the US efforts are successful in the absence of a Kyoto framework - while people the Kyoto countries continue to fail and INCREASE their emissions.  That is hypocritical.

Again, you fail to rebut anything that I've said.  I'm not making a statement one way or the other on past pollution or per capita emissions.  I'm stating that the US emissions are decreasing and EU emissions are increasing - all in light of Kyoto.  You've failed to reply to that point, well, because you can't.  It's true.

You still are cute when you fume though.  It's comical, really.  But thanks for playing along.  You've been a good sport.

Say, why do you think the emmisions of 2006 is more important than those from 1990-2005 and those projected until 2030. Do you seriously believe time stopped in 2006 ?

The has consistently been increasing 3-4 times as fast as the Europe. Give it up, you are just being rediculous.

Anyhow as long as you 4 times worse per capita than any other large country like China of the EU, your bitching really doent cut it.

Btw. How are you and your friend in the flat-earth society ? This review of your favourite WSJ article us really hilarious:

http://scitizen.com/stories/Climate-Change/2008/03/The-Last-Gasp-of-the-Climate-Deniers-Detractors-and-Doomsayers/

By the way here is what Greenpeace has to say about the US energy policy:

I hope you are enjoying your position together with countries like Ethiopia and Zimbabwe as the only industrialized countries failing to ratify Kyoto  :)


US trying to destroy international efforts to save the climate
Posted by tracy on 13 December 2007.

Our colleagues have been leaked information from a meeting in Bali tonight – the US is trying to destroy international efforts to tackle climate change. They are trying to insert text into the Kyoto Protocol that would make emissions cuts voluntary – as opposed to the current mandatory cuts.

The proposed US text includes the words ‘as appropriate’ and ‘may’ in reference to emissions cuts and is being presented to a meeting of the Friends of the President in Bali tonight. Here it is:

(b) enhanced action on mitigation of climate change, and the means to recognise such action, in the context of sustainable development, including, inter alia, consideration of:

(i) effective, measurable and reportable domestic mitigation actions, [depending on the level of economic development and significance] [ depending on the level of economic development and GHG contributions][depending on the level of economic development and energy utilisation][in accordance with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and responsive capabilities]:

(a) including, as appropriate, quantified national emission limitation and reduction objectives, taking into account national circumstances and relative level of efforts;

(b) including, as appropriate, domestic plans and measures that may include binding, market-based and sectoral programs; and

(c) supported, as appropriate, by external technology, financing and capacity building.

If the United States succeeds tonight, the post-2012 agreement will allow any nation to opt out and continue to pollute with abandon.

As Al Gore said today at the Bali meeting: "My own country, the United States is principally responsible for obstructing progress here in Bali. We all know that. But my country is not the only one that can take steps to ensure that we move forward from Bali with progress and with hope."

If they get this text through the conference then the next treaty won’t be worth the paper it’s written on because it will give a free pass to any nation that wants to keep polluting. It is time for all other nations in Bali to ignore attempts by the US to dismantle efforts to save the climate.

Way to miss the point.  Again.  Want to take another shot at it?  It's really not that hard.

No I don't need another go. Your point has already been thrashed ...

Here is another set of statistics showing that the US are worst polluters in the world:
http://www.earth-policy.org/Indicators/CO2/2008_data.htm#fig2

Whatever you say, sport.

I think it's the "ostrich in the sand" syndrome.  You can continue to close your eyes and deny reality, but you have yet to provide any facts that contradict my point:  that the US is decreasing its emissions while the EU hypocritically increases theirs.  Your points don't address trends, only volume.  Address trends. 

Why have nearly all (or maybe all) of the Kyoto signatories failed to meet their agreement terms and instead of reducing emissions, have actually increased them?  Why do you think the US should sign on to the Kyoto protocol in light of its absolute failure among those already signing it?  Particularly, answer why the US should sign on when the non-Kyoto measures undertaken by the US are, in fact, decreasing US emissions, while Europe continues to increase its emissions?

But you won't address that.  Predictably, you'll post something irrelevant.  Again.  You are cute for trying to keep up though.  I appreciate that.  Address the trends, please, won't you?

Volume is what contributes to the greenhouse effect.  A statistical outlier in terms of increase/decreaser is irrelevant in the long term perspective.  The development over decades and the total amount of CO2 is what counts.

Here is more evidence of the US's miserably failing environmental policy:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/jun/29/travelandtransport.usnews

I am laughing my ass off here you know :-)

You can't hide the facts that the us is the second worst CO2 polluter in the world, generating 4 times as much CO2 as china per capita - regardless of what bogus statistics you cite.

Again (you have trouble getting this it seems), you are in no position to bitch about China, as long as the US is doing 3-4 times as bad per capita.

Well a change one year is irrelevant in light of a systematic increase ove the last 20 years.

It's not the change that contributes relevant to the greenhouse effect - it's the AMOUNT of emissions.
Ok now I have addressed that point and show you decreas to be irrellevant.

Tha min thing is that US is still 4 times worse per capita than China (and the EU), there is no way you can hide that fact no matter how many times you cite you single source of bogus statistics.

Quit bitching, moron ...

Great, so it looks like we agree that the US is decreasing its emissions, while the EU hypocritically increases their emissions in spite of the Kyoto Protocols.

Next question:  Why should the US sign Kyoto then?

Let's focus - you have this jejune habit of meandering onto irrelevant topics.

The US already signed, but did not ratify the Kyoto protocol.

If it is ratified by the US it makes a legally binding commitment to reducing the emissions.
The US refuses to do that because it apparently intends to keep its positions as one of the worst per capita polluters in the world.

That is in short why the US environmental policy is morally bankrupt.

Your argument doesn't make sense in light of the facts that I posted that US emissions are decreasing.  How do you reconcile your statement that: 

"The US...intends to keep its positions as one of the worst per capita polluters in the world."

with the fact that US emissions are decreasing year to year, as shown above?  If the US intended to keep its position as one of the worse per capita polluters in the world, wouldn't it follow the EU model and actually increase its emissions, like Europe?

Your statement doesn't comport with reality.  Try again.

Rofl, the US is already 3-4 times worse than everyone else - there will need to be alot of decrese before you are down to the level point where you have comparable emissions to civilized nations.

Again:

How do you explain your statement that the US intends to maintain its position as the worst per capita polluter in light of its decreasing emissions?  Justify your statement.
How do you explain your argument faulting the US for not signing/ratifying the Kyoto Protocols in light of the EU's failure to meet its commitments under Kyoto?  Especially in light that not only is the EU not meeting its reduction goals, the EU is actually increasing its emissions of greenhouse gases?

Respond.  Try hard to address the issue.  Take one last go at it.

Do you now understand that the US is one of the worst polluters in the world,  and probalbly the worst
when it comes to CO2 ?

I will be waiting for you answer ... please try to adress the issue ...

What is the target for the US when it comes to the per-capita emissions in say 2015 ?

I've never denied that the US is a leading emitter of greenhouse gases.  You are a very poor debater.  A very poor logician, certainly.

At least the question is then settled (again by your refusal to respond) that US emissions are decreasing; EU emissions are increasing.  The US is doing exactly what it said it would do, honestly and up front.  The EU is failing to do what they pledged to do and hypocritically criticizes the US while EU emissions continue to increase year after year.  The US was wise to not sign Kyoto.  It proves that the signatory countries are more interested in words than actions.  The US is engaging the problem and reducing its emissions.  The EU talks about the problem and increases their emissions.

At least that's settled.  Thanks for the discussion.

Good that you agree that the US is a worse per capita CO2 polluter than 90 % of the rest of the world, and in particular worse than both China and the EU. Good that we could settle that ...

Then may I ask, why did you start bitching about China when the US is actually worse ?

Here you're comparing apples to oranges, you know that.

The emission of greenhouse gases - although a problem, isn't the pollution that was being discussed in this thread.  It was red herring introduced by you.  The pollution that is discussed in this thread is the Chinese filth and pollution that is regularly pumped into their groundwater, soil, rivers and air.  It is the desertification of nearly half their country.  It is the staggering increase of acidic rain pouring down on the heads of the hapless Chinese citizenry.  Those are different issues.  This filth and pollution that China is content contaminating its environment is now spreading to South Korea and Japan.  It is an entirely different issue.  I trust that is clearer than the water in Beijing, that is, if you can even see it during the regular sandstorms.

It is good that we settled that the EU signatories are hypocrites for calling on the US on Kyoto, when the US is actually reducing their emissions while the EU steadily increases theirs.

Well most informed people see the Co2 and greenhouse gas emissions as the most important pollution seen from a global perspective, but apparently not you ...

Whatever subjective importance people place on that issue, that wasn't the point of the thread - just a non sequitor you introduced.  Again, I'm glad we cleared that up as well.

Here is a barchart of the US emmission data from the link you posted with the latest US statistics:

http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/5165/usegreenhousegas1990200yv4.jpg

ROFL - the decrease in the last year  that you touted in 20 posts or almost within well with the standard deviation of the data. (reduction is 90 and the standard deviation around 80).

Link for the full report: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads/08_Trends.pdf

Kinda shows what a self-righteous bastards you and the guys at WSJ are, doesn't it ?

As opposed to the self-righteous bastards in the EU that bemoan our decreases while they increase their emissions?  Right, gotcha.  Hyopcrites and liars.  If nothing else, the US is living up to what it said it would do.  The Kyoto signers are not.

Yeah, the US set out to do nothing and is doing nothing ...

On the other hand 19 out 29 European countries are on track to fulfil their obligations according to the Kyoto agreement, which is an 8 % reduction target.

Another cool statistic proving the absence of a sustainable environmental policy in the US:
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2006/2006-06-28-03.asp

ROFL

You lie as easily as breathe.  I've already shown that the US is decreasing emissions while the hypocrites under Kyoto are increasing emissions.  But continue to prattle on.  Facts haven't stopped you in the past, I don't expect they will now either.

Well the FACTS are that the "decrease" you talk about is within the natural statistical variation of the data.
Go back a few posts and look at the diagram I showed you and the truth will be painfully obvioius, liar ...

I hope you enjoy the company of Zimbabwe and Ethiopa as the only (?) countries that failed to ratify Kyota ....

That's not what the report stated.  Again, you've never let facts influence your posts so far, why start now?  All those Kyoto signatories increasing their emissions... wow, I sure am glad that it's worked wonders.

Noone can look at this and call it a steady decrease:

http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/5165/usegreenhousegas1990200yv4.jpg

The last year reduction is 90 and the standard deviation of the last 6 years data is 80.

You are a liar, and you have been exposed ...

So...what's next? How do we deal with exposed liars? Do we shot them on the back of their neck, like in the good ol' China style?  :)

Your arguing, kinda reminds me the old communist dinosaurs from back home.
You may think that you are smarter than other, but did you see, smell, touch the capitalist system?
I remember back in high-school, I had a professor teaching "Communist Economy" and was snubbing the capitalist system, because otherwise The Party will skin him alive and serve his balls as dinner to the hungry students.

About a year ago, I met him in Toronto, in a car dealership. We both had the surprise of our life, he was very happy with his new life and he told me that the bullshit he was preaching back home, helped him in his new career. Because, you see, as a professor, he knew how the free market works, he wanted all his life to break free from the evil system that was suffocating him; when he got the opportunity - a business trip to Canada- he declared himself a political refugee.

I bet if you get this opportunity too, we will see you swearing back at your old Commie pals.

That's why I don't really blame you for what you write here, I understand your suffering and I feel for you, buddy. You just have to be optimistic, nothing is forever, change will come, sooner or later.

The real problem with China is that the ruling class has plenty of cash for buying luxury German sedans with tinted windows, but nary a cent for cleaning up the environment. Take a look at the "canals" (open sewers, really) that run through major cities including Beijing. You can smell them for miles....but the luxury housing compounds for party officials are always located far, far away from the reality that most citizens there must suffer under! If it doesn't help keep them in power, they have no interest in doing anything.

According to such, down, the world is Chinese sooner or later. That we are best because of China thinks of and USA develops the economic cooperation simultaneous, makes the Chinese ally realize that China now already can not defend their ally's benefit , that using the country who thinks that the strength contends with USA other drawing support from China splits out Chinese Bund , makes their relation break up by the fact that ally's attack acting , making China maintain neutrality to China,makes their consciousness have no way to unite, thereby can only cling to USA. But USA can draw support from China and homeland relation aggravating is in progress to Chinese peaceful evolution. One aspect disintegrates away the Chinese threat in Asian and host position , unceasingly, that one aspect uses their teenager's thought rebels against the tradition that they unite , makes them egoistic. The messenger world unites thereby within west regime. This good way being really achieving two things at one stroke.

The world must have the leading factor country and govern the country anyhow , be not that the eastern country is the Western countries. China is a threat: China has wanted to develop the economy , has developed thereupon. Think of the position having arranged the world , thereupon, having controlled USA , having consolidated China with economy foreign trade in Asian. Capitalism doctrine has implacable contradiction with public property. Be that social nature decides. Therefore China and early USA party war. After China is big and powerful, the certain meeting leading factor world replaces USA. Than USA waiting for Chinese queen war big and powerful, why do not take advantage of China not having developed time war big and powerful now? Do abandon politics benefit because of seeking trade benefit right away?

If being able to unite Korea, military base founding USA in Korea and , all being able to threaten China and Russian directly like that right away, USA troops can land to fight directly from Korea to the Chinese native country right away. But dispatch troops to the defensive needing to face all armed forces of Chinese and military affairs area then first from Taiwan, attack facing the submarine group. But resolve away Korea after uniting a problem, upper Chinese borderline troops has been more with regard to being fond of dealing with. The littoral highway that China builds along Yalu River has a gigantic weakness , the highway is single line connection style.Cut off the littoral highway as long as exploding, the common people can only escape to the high mountain , backup force is slow because troops there being no a highway , Jilin province final comes to the end of a blind alley. Especially the Shenyang military region backup force to frontier is also defective. Have no way with strategically important area Jilin province Lin Jiang City , Jilin governor public market , Jilin province Ji An City right away, Shenyang province Dan Dong City is listed in along the line all in Yalu River. Except Jilin province Hui Chun City, the province city marches towards other from Korea acquiring a thing easily. Chang Bai mountain making use of Korea Republic to want to call back is an excuse or, after Korea is unified , is right and proper to let Korea Republic and Korea dispatch troops to capturing Jilin.Be just Jilin thereby in inside of Chinese, be quartered USA troops. Blow up the Songnen plain , Chinese north part people having to be hard up right away. While marching towards from Korea, from Japan dispatches troops to the military region restraining Jinan, from Taiwan dispatching troops to the hinderland restraining southeast , Xizang is at the same time independent , make China collapse. This all be to be in the cards very much! The Jilin province falls into enemy's hands , will be equal to the Heilongjiang province fall into enemy's hands, beat the Shenyang military region , press up to Beijing right away on and on, the fake information propagating Beijing to the south at the same time falling into enemy's hands, uses Chinese riot thereby. A 1,400,000,000 country turmoil , consequence can only beneficial to USA.

china will be clearner soon.  every year china is better getting and develping.  soon it will be much better than the usa and the citie's are already cleaner than the usa cities.

Your propaganda might be easier to stomach if you actually even attempted to back up what you say.  Since you don't and can't we all know it to be lies.

Because i am china and i see chinese city every day getting better and better while your countries go down the sinkhole.

Right.  We are here, and we see our beautiful cities, our populations not being beaten by the government, and we see your shoddy construction practices that kill thousands during earthquakes and your oppressive censorship.  Your country is sinking into it's own filth.  Enjoy your shit hole, and stay there.

you don't undersatnd the working of china.  those poor buildings are due to local coruption.  central government is working hard to solve that.  it will take a long time.

but china is geting bettter.  you cant deny that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bosf0FvPjdc

To be honest, I don't know if it is getting better or not.  I am not an expert on China, never having been there.  My point was mostly that we both can make idiotic statements without proof.  Mine is every bit as meaningless as yours was.  Without corroborating evidence, neither means much.

The Chinese government is corrupt - there's no doubt about that.  The Communist Party does not care about the children killed - there's also no doubt about that. 

China is not "getting better."  China is getting uglier, dirtier, more corrupt, more authoritarian.  The worst part of it is that the Chinese people have lived under this brutal, tyrannical dictatorship for so long, they don't know any better.

And of course, the Communist Chinese government won't allow the internet or the media into China without government censors so the good people of China can't even get a glimpse of the outside world where their government is almost universally denounced.

Look at the Olympic torch runs...protests all the way through.  What a major embarassment.  The IOC made a huge mistake awarding the Olympic games to a brutal Communist dictatorship full of corrupt goons, thugs and murderers.

The only good thing - at least the Olympics and the earthquake will expose China for what it really is -- a corrupt Communist dictatorship that regularly murders, imprisons and denies its own citizenry even basic human rights.

Thank you for the entertainment.

Say,  do you really think anyone takes your bigotry seriously in this  thread after your failed attempt at whitewashing the sorry excuse for a US environmental policy  ;D

You'll let me know when the Europeans finally live up to their Kyoto promises, instead of increasing their greenhouse gas emissions.  Unlike the US, which has declining emissions.  Till then, cheers!~

You must have missed this link:

http://img397.imageshack.us/img397/5165/usegreenhousegas1990200yv4.jpg

Or maybe you just about as clever as your posts suggests  ;D

Keep dreamin'.  Hope springs eternal.

Great job on failing Kyoto - that sure was effective!

ROFL,  you keep touting the 2006 figure for the US which is the 3rd highest in 20 years as a decrease, proving that you are not only as spineless as a worm but also as brainless   ;D

Fact is that most European countries are on track for reaching the Kyoto goals:
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3423930,00.html

Another fact is tha