Will China bite the environmental bullet?

China is starting to realize that to go to a cleaner environment and to increase its energy efficiency is going to be costly. They estimate that the cost will be $300 billion over the next 5 years. They believe that supplying the technology will provide business opportunities. See Peoples Daily Online article, "Cost of going green."

They claim that “China has vowed to cut its per-unit energy consumption by about 20 percent and discharge of pollutants by 10 percent between 2006 and 2010.” These are modest targets indeed; in the end they will likely require more stringent cuts. As the economy grows and more energy generation and industrial sources are opened in a fixed land area, the emissions from individual sources will have to be reduced so as to allow maintaining healthy ambient air quality levels. The issue of what will be the allowable emissions from individual will become more critical as more automobiles go onto the roads.

Concern was expressed on how to impose the cost on among those who nay have more-or-less ability to adsorb the costs. Policymakers are urged to develop fiscal and tax incentives to ease the cost burden. It sounds almost capitalistic, doesn’t it

Instead the Chinese policymakers should arm the State Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) with the necessary regulating, monitoring and enforcement powers, and tools perhaps modeled after the U.S. EPA. Once this is done SEPA could be provided with enough staff to fulfill the emission. With such a scenario, Chinese industry, using the same abilities that promoted the huge economic expansion, will bring pollution under control in a relatively rapid order.

Can China do it? Article 26 of China’s Constitution says it can!

“Article 26. The state protects and improves the living environment and the ecological environment, and prevents and controls pollution and other public hazards. The state organizes and encourages afforestation and the protection of forests.”

China’s role in stable global grain prices

Recently there has been a global upsurge of inflation in food prices, especially for grains. Grains are so important, that increases in their cost ultimately affect other food prices, especially meat products. Globalization has become such a strong force that the effects of ones segment of the globe could affect the world.

Concerns have been expressed about the roles of countries such as China and India whose burgeoning economies, from their globalization roles, in pushing up the prices of foods, petroleum and other commodities. If China does not address these concerns, it will be subjected to continuing criticism from the global community.

In Peoples Daily Online, according to its Ministry of Agriculture, China is a net exporter of grains. It has increased production from its arable lands and has even built up a stored surplus. By it reckoning, it is therefore not contributing to the increase of cereal prices.

If the above is correct, China should be commended for their having achieved self-sufficiency in grains. However, before giving them credit for having done so, other aspects of globalization has to be looked at before the book is closed on the subject and China is let off the hook. How much meat products are being imported, that is dependent upon grains and cereals? What are the effects of rising energy costs, especially from petroleum, that China is contributing to? The answer is not simple!

China's eye popper

The current issue of the Economist contains an informative article Rushing on by road, rail and air that lays out the huge growth in China's infrastructure. Reading the article adds to our knowledge of the huge effect of China's growth upon its human population.

The eye-opener, for me, was the last paragraph which mentions China's plan for building an express highway from Beijing to Taipei in Taiwan to be completed by 2030. It does not mention either an agreement will be reached with Taiwan or how it will traverse the 150 km Taiwan Strait.

Coal and electric power in China

China’s burgeoning demand for electrical energy is straining the country’s ability to provide the coal that is needed to fire the power plant boilers; about 80% of the country’s electrical energy comes from coal. Coal mining in China is a deadly industry with last year’s toll being 3,786 killed in mine accidents. Unfortunately, it is liable to get worse as many unsafe mines are opened to meet the growing need. What is not being publicized in the news announcements, such as in a recent New York Times article, is that in addition to the horrible human cost in mining, is the likely effect upon both the power generation and the environment.

The majority of coal-fired electric generating plants (90%+) use an electrostatic precipitator (ESP)to remove the fine fly ash particles from the gas stream before it exits the stack. Most power plants, in our country, and many others, design and optimize the boiler and ESP, plus auxiliaries including the coal pulverizer, air preheater and ash handling system, for a specific coal, which is used exclusively for the operating life of the power station.

From the New York Times article, I concluded that many Chinese power stations will be making “spot” purchases of coal, to keep operating, rather than relying on long-term contracts. In other words the coal purchased one-month could be different than the coal purchased the following month. What does this mean?

China has a huge variation in their coals, with different compositions and heat values. For example in a plant set–up for a low ash coal that switches to one with a high ash having a lower heat value, because of what is available on the “spot’ market that month, will mean that the power generated by the station will be de-rated because less heat energy is available from the coal that could be fed to the boiler. The additional fly ash could overwhelm the ESP. If, at the same time, the sulfur and trace sodium in the new coal is significantly lower, the operation of the ESP will be worsened even further. Particulate emissions from some plants could increase by a factor of 2 to 4, or even more. Fine particulates emissions currently cause many early deaths in China. This is why, in our country, there is a stringent, generally enforced, particulate National Ambient Air Quality Standard based upon particles of 2.5 μm or less.

From everything that I hear, the push in China today is for more, more, more electrical generation. To keep the power stations going, mine safety, decreased generation from some stations and worsened emissions will follow behind.

Constitution of the People's Republic of China

To further understand the working of the Government of modern China, I found online the current Chinese Constitution, adopted on December 4, 1982. I did not go through it in detail, but what I did see was illuminating, especially Articles 56 to 68.

The ruling body in China is the National Peoples Congress (NPC), which has the power to do virtually anything that it wants. The NPC, from its members, populates the Standing Committee, consisting of the Chairman, Vice-Chairmen and Secretary-General, plus some additional members; it is where decisions are made. Delegates to the NPC are elected, under the eye of the Standing Committee, by the” provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the Central Government, and by the armed forces;” no specific instructions appear in the Constitution to govern how delegates are elected to the NPC.

Amendments to the Constitution are made by the NPC; they can therefore change the Constitution whenever the situation requires it. Since this constitution was adapted in 1882, four amendments have been added. The 1^st, adopted on April 12, 1988, is of particular interest to us because it introduced a parallel market force (capitalist) driven economy "The State permits the private sector of the economy to exist and develop within the limits prescribed by law. The private sector of the economy is a complement to the socialist public economy. The State protects the lawful rights and interests of the private sector of the economy, and exercises guidance, supervision and control over the private sector of the economy"

As the country develops further, significant conflicts may arise between the two the two political philosophies being practiced in China – socialist /communist or capitalist. At some point the Chinese may have to decide what they are.

Chinese New Year

With the Chinese New Year upon us an interesting and light story "How the Grinch Stole Chinese New Year,"appeared in Slate by April Rabkin, about how its celebration has changed over the years. Ms. Rabkin has appeared to have done her home work.

Mao's swim

On July 16, 1966 it was reported that Mao Zedong swam in the Yangtze River at Wuhan. The reported event was a masterpiece by showing that Mao, then 73, was strong and was a force to be reckoned with. It helped provide further rapport with China’s youth, for his forthcoming Cultural Revolution. In some respects the reported facts about the swim was just too spectacular. I have tried to do some more studying of the actual event, mainly on the internet. Unfortunately, nothing emerged that can be traced directly back to the event. But I do want to share what I have learned,

First, here is some of the information that I have gathered from two sources listed below and others, from Google Earth’s view of Wuhan (attached).Swimming the Yangtze at Wuhan was an event that has been going on for some time; Mao swam at Wuhan at least twice previously. The distance swam has been reported as 10 miles, 15 km, and 30 li, all of which are approximately the same distance. The time in the water was 65 minutes much of which time he floated along rather than swim. The start of the swim was at the First Bridge, which Mao had dedicated some years earlier. The width of the Yangtze is approximately 1 km. A reported river current velocity, for one of the swimming events, after some period of rain was 2.06 m/s. The time for the 1500 meter men’s freestyle record is a bit over 14 minutes, which for steady swimming would require in excess of 140 minutes and super-human capability to swim 15 km.

With the above information in hand and without trying to be very scientific, I would like to try and make some sense out of Mao’s swim. Mao did not swim steadily for 15 km. Assuming that he allowed himself to be carried along by the current and using the 2.06 m/s velocity, he would have been carried about 8000m (8 km) in 65 minutes that would have required an additional 7 k m of swimming and which would probably be beyond the capability of a world champion swimmer. Therefore Mao was either in the water for more than 65 minutes or else he did not go for 15 km. If the water velocity had been greater than 2.06 m/s, a very dangerous current in excess of 5 m/s would have been required to carry him far downstream..

This exercise is not meant to denigrate Mao’s accomplishment and the very important historical importance of it. It is meant to better understand the physical aspects of the swim and to suggest that in the news release that perhaps the facts were stretched a bit.

Some of my sources are Times Asia and the official Wuhan Municipality website. Notice the small map of the Yangtze River, First Bridge and typical swim paths that are on the order of a couple of kilo meters. The small map can be compared from the Google Earth Wuhan image from which the river width was determined.