Chinese Publicity on Reducing CO2 Emissions Is Window Dressing Rather Than Reality.

E-Mail to Congress:

EIN News says, "China Makes Inroads on Emissions. When it comes to climbing China's bureaucratic ladder, closing factories to cut greenhouse gas emissions can be a career booster. (washingtonpost.com)".

The implication from the above statement is that China is making significant progress in controlling emission of carbon dioxide, which has been in the news as a major greenhouse gas. However, let's look at the complete article (http://energy.einnews.com/article.php?oid=9nX+f3HxGidATdw&v=57603EAgzp8B2Cz/6DLTbIETWb2WFzdWM).

Huang Huikang is vice mayor of Tangshan in northeastern China. Huang says that he and his colleagues shuttered factories in Tangshan, a major steel- and cement-producing center and replaced them with cleaner-burning plants.

Production of steel and cement requires large amounts of heat. This is routinely obtained by the burning of fossil fuels, such as coal, oil, or natural gas. Some steel plants use an electric arc process, but this also involves use of fossil fuels to generate electricity to produce the arc. "Cleaner burning plants" do not involve a major change in technology. Those plants are still generating large quantities of carbon dioxide, which is not mentioned in the article. There is only a vague reference to greenhouse gases. Notice also that the required heat could be generated from solar panels and wind turbines, but there is no mention of this. The reason is that, in the present stage of technology, it is economically impractical to do so.

The whole article smacks of bias toward the great job the Chinese are doing, but the Chinese themselves say they have no data to indicate whether they are making any progress toward reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Any action may be more of a showpiece rather than of practical significance. As Chinese become wealthier, buy cars and move to the city at a rate of 24 million a year, all of this contributes to higher carbon emissions.

The statement of "career booster" mentioned in the EIN news announcement above escapes me. I didn't see any reference to making jobs or boosting the careers of individuals. As efforts to improve efficiency in a manufacturing operation require people of education and capability, it is obvious that those people are necessary in contrast to day-laborers.