Finance, Forex and Investments

How does the rest of the world expect China and India to curb global warming?

What should the consequences be for those countries if they thumb their nose at the "rest of the world" and continue to burn carbon-based fuels at a high rate (assuming that Western Europe and the USA instantiate a "cap-and-trade" system)? So, US companies are exploiting workers in China and India and creating high emissions so the citizens of those countries can lead a better middle class life? Which is it?

Public Comments

1. With both of their population so large it is to late unless some miracle solutions come along
2. What is your economic situation like? Do you lead a middle class or better North American like standard of living, and how do you think our economies got to this level? Do you think just maybe that the CO2 that's in the atmosphere now gave you that standard of living that China and India are now trying to obtain? So if you are living the good life, maybe they would like a piece of the middle class pie like us in the west? The problem is the west is primarily the cause of the problem. Why should China and India be expected to limit their quality of life because of the damage the west did to the atmosphere and refused to curb its emissions? But rest assured, China is taking action on climate change more seriously than the United States or Canada. Did you know that it’s because of the western consumer and their demand for cheap disposable goods that China’s and India have increased emissions now? Western companies have been shutting down production lines in the west to take advantage of cheap labour and lax emission standards. So in reality it’s our own companies that are doing the damage in a foreign land. Perhaps if you are indeed concerned, you should first check how many things you have purchased lately that have been made in China. So you could say that by buying from these countries you are partly to blame. "So, US companies are exploiting workers in China and India and creating high emissions so the citizens of those countries can lead a better middle class life? Which is it?" addendum: No, American companies are exploiting the fact that many of the unskilled workers make peanuts and that those countries have lax environmental laws. American companies are not the ones exploiting the workers, because that's the job of the factory owners that are contracted to make the goods. As a whole, it's not the unskilled factory workers that are benefiting and entering the middle class, it’s the support areas from the trickle down from the manufacturing. So as the North American manufacturing job is shipped overseas, the Chinese worker isn't much better off since neofeudalism is keeping the worker poor.
3. When we enter a cap-and-trade system the economy will officially die
4. its an impossible situation that cant be sustained for very long. they have to keep increasing production to keep improving their standard of living. China alone has been building new coal plants at the unbelievable rate of an average of 1 every 3 days. if they put pollution controls on these plants they will lose most of their production cost advantage resulting in decreased sales & increased unemployment. this could lead to political unrest in their country & possibly revolution. at the same time smog in the grand canyon & the western U.S.has been identified as largely coming from China. as this pollution gets worse the U.S. will be forced to try to do something about it. trade sanctions will be difficult because it will raise prices on products imported from China(just about everything we use) not to mention China has been financing a great deal of U.S. debt since the late 80's& they conceivably could make the dollar about as worthless as toilet paper if we provoke them. I'm going to have to stop now,I'm getting depressed.
5. They're already working on it. They are developing natural gas vehicles and fueling infrastructure (as we should be doing here in the US) in both countries since gasoline availability and prices can't be trusted. I have 2 natural gas powered vehicles, so I have done some research on the subject. India is actually ahead of us in this department and China isn't far behind. Natural gas is cheap (I'm paying 80 cents a gallon for it now) and there's plenty of it, especially in the form of hydrates under the ocean floor. If the world would ever put some real effort into this, we wouldn't need the Middle East's oil, and the air would be all the cleaner for it, since natural gas burns much cleaner than gasoline. Just my 2 cents on the subject.
6. blaming the 3rd world countries is always easier, right? let forget that Europe and North America has been pumped out deadly emissions gas for more than 100 years. yeah do nothing to help the poorer nation. keep blaming them.
7. So you don't like china or india? Dude i wouldn't say that too loud! china has the world's largest army and india follows! Dude if you tell them to quite using they'll freaking kill you! Plus let them boom! They let the US boomed! heck they helped build the rail way!
8. "Given appropriate priority and resources, the option of secure, low-waste 4th generation nuclear power (see below) could be available within about a decade. If, by then, wind, solar, other renewables, and an improved grid prove to be capable of handling all of our electrical energy needs, there would be no imperative to construct nuclear plants in the United States. Many energy experts consider an all-renewable scenario to be implausible in the time-frame when coal emissions must be phased out, but it is not necessary to debate that matter. However, it would be dangerous to proceed under the presumption that we will soon have all-renewable electric power. Also it would be inappropriate to impose a similar presumption on China and India. Both countries project large increases in their energy needs, both countries have highly polluted atmospheres primarily due to excessive coal use, and both countries stand to suffer inordinately if global climate change continues. The entire world stands to gain if China and India have options to reduce their CO2 emissions and air pollution. Mercury emissions from their coal plants, for example, are polluting the global atmosphere and ocean and affecting the safety of foods, especially fish, on a near-global scale. And there is little hope of stabilizing climate unless China and India have low- and no-CO2 energy options." "If the United States accedes to the ineffectual ‘goals’ and ‘caps’ approach, a continuation of the Kyoto Protocol approach, it will practically guarantee disastrous climate change. Instead it should persuasively argued that other countries also adopt tax and dividend. The countries agreeing to this approach will also agree that imports from a country that does not apply a comparable carbon tax will be taxed at the port of entry. That import tax will be a strong incentive for all countries to participate." http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/20081121_Obama.pdf
9. I can't say what the consequences "should be"--but I can tell you what the consequences WILL e if China and India do not focuse on reducing carbon emissions. They will lose the gains they have made in economic growth and competitiveness. Period. The reason is simple. Alternative energy--whether solar, wind, nuclear, etc., and energy efficient systems of all kinds, are--or soon will be--more cost effective than fossil fuels. If China and India continue to commit themselves to a coal/oil based economy, they are simply going to price themselves out of the market when it comes to world trade. However--that's very unlikely to happen.Bot h countries are already aware of this and are acting accordingly. India is investing heavily in nuclear and solar power. Chinese policy is supportive of alternative energy--and jsut last week a Chinese company rolled out the worlds first mass production all-electric car. European nations are also leaders in shifting out of a fossil fuel economy. The one major industrialized nation that is dragging its feet --due exclusively to the politically-motivated interference in the economy by the conservatives--is the United States. Fortunately for our future ecconomic growth, tha tis about to change. Environmentalists need to realize this--and as yet, most don't. Going green is simply good business. Oil and coal are obsolete technologies, slated for history's junkyard along with sailing ships, horse-drawn wagons, and other outmoded technology. The efforts of special interests (oil and coal companies, etc.) aren't going to change that, merely delay it. Environmentalist groups need to be supporting an open and free market--because oil and coal cannot compete. They are surviving now only because politicians are interfering with the market to protect ther interests.
10. I think this is a very good question. Right now the Chinese government are estimating a doubling of their own CO2 emissions by 2050. That's another China! They aren't going to achieve it through wind or solar. I'd like to say they could but they can't. Ramped up nuclear will help, but coal looks to still be the primary source of their energy going forward for a long time. The one thing (I won't call it a positive) China has is that it has a totalitarian government who don't care much about their people. If they (the Chinese government) saw that climate change was a big enough danger to their existence (for example from massive droughts/famine) they would be one of the only governments in the world that could mobilise enough the make a real change. Of course by then it may well be too late, and there would potentially be a huge human cost on what they do too... It's a bad situation that will probably only get worse. As for India, while it's true they're also got a lot of potential for emissions growth, it's still not on the scale of China. Plus one great ace up India's sleeve is their research into Thorium Nuclear, which has massive potential not only for their energy needs but also a lot more of the world.
11. China is doing what it can to curb the emission. Actually China has favored the Kyoto Agreement. India is a totally different situation. 80 % of its population live in villages and burn coal and wood. Deforestation is the main problem.
12. This problem has been building for 150 years, through most of that time China and India have been basic agricultural economy's. Industrialisation started in Europe and soon followed in the U.S. Anyone who has studied a little history would know that both China and India were pretty much exploited by the west till they became independent both countries missed the industrial revolution and are now trying to catch up to the level, the rest of us take for granted.