https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... ate-change
Its got 17 points, so I will highlight the point I want to discuss. An emissions trading scheme because anyone in Australia who hasn't been living under a rock will know that its quite controversial.
For a nice commentary on the scheme, see hereChina also plans to start in 2017 its national emission trading system, covering key industry sectors such as iron and steel, power generation, chemicals, building materials, paper-making, and nonferrous metals.
http://theconversation.com/china-announ ... eact-48159
I have previously noted my own country's pathetic attempt to shirk responsibility and saying "well the rest of the world isn't doing anything," despite blatant evidence that they are actually are. For example Abbott, our fallen PM once stated no one else is even attempting a carbon tax, then his supporters got schooled when it turns out the EU had already done so FOR YEARS. We then get to China and Indian aren't doing anything, even though at that time China already rolled out localised emission trading schemes to test it ( since 2011) , while India already had a tax on carbon emissions. Anyone who could spend say 10 minutes tops on Google could find this out, but right wing climate change deniers aren't exactly known for their intellectual rigor.China announces national emissions trading scheme - experts react
September 26, 2015 2.29pm AEST
China has confirmed that it will launch its national emissions trading scheme.
In a joint US-China climate statement, issued as part of President Xi Jinping’s state visit to the United States, China confirmed that its new trading sytem will cover “key industry sectors such as iron and steel, power generation, chemicals, building materials, paper-making, and nonferrous metals”.
Below, our experts react to the development.
John Mathews, Professor of Strategic Management, Macquarie Graduate School of Management, Macquarie University
Xi Jinping is scoring a propaganda coup by announcing China’s intention to introduce a national cap-and-trade scheme in 2017, while he is a guest of Obama at the White House. It will not be lost on observers that China will be introducing the very kind of scheme that failed to get through the US Congress, passing the House but being defeated in the Senate.
How interesting that China the communist country is introducing the kind of market-based emissions trading scheme that the United States was unable to launch.
There are two further points to make. The first is that China is introducing its national scheme after trying out various options as local and city-level experimental schemes over the past couple of years. In 2012, pilot programs were initiated in seven provinces, and have been closely monitored since. Here China is teaching the world a lesson in how to introduce reform: first try it out at a small scale in a variety of forms, and then scale up the most successful.
Second, China is not relying on these market-led cap-and-trade initiatives alone. It is also reducing coal consumption in its power sector through direct state intervention, and has been actively promoting solar photovoltaic and wind power through state-guided targeted investment, national planning, and local promotion programs. So the new scheme will take its place as an initiative that helps to solidify China’s trajectory towards greening its energy systems – after direct state action has done the heavy lifting.
Anita Talberg, PhD candidate, Australian-German Climate and Energy College, University of Melbourne
China’s greenhouse gas emissions represent a quarter of the global total. For this reason alone, any tangible progress on Chinese climate action is encouraging. However, what is more promising is what a Chinese emissions trading scheme could mean for the world.
To date we have only seen pockets of emissions trading across the globe; most notably the EU has had a scheme since 2004 and a Californian system has been operating since 2013. Despite concerted efforts, there has been very little headway in linking regional emissions trading schemes. This is because carbon credits would become fungible.
So if one market crashes, so do the connected markets. The entire system is only as strong as the safeguards in the weakest market. The environmental effectiveness of the entire system is only as credible as the monitoring and verification in the least stringent scheme.
The EU and the rest of the world will be looking closely at the integrity and robustness of the Chinese market’s design. If China gets it right, and can elicit enough buy-in, it could represent a turning point for climate change.
Peter Christoff, Associate Professor, School of Geography at University of Melbourne
The announced introduction of China’s national emissions trading scheme in 2017 places irresistible pressure on Malcolm Turnbull to revisit the issue of an Australian ETS.
When China joins the European Union (the world’s third biggest aggregate emitter) and a number of other major emitting countries and states using cap-and-trade schemes to help cut emissions, some 40% of total global emissions will be covered by carbon markets.
Tellingly, Chinese President Xi Jinping made his announcement at a joint White House Press Conference with President Obama. Together they emphasised how the world’s two largest emitters are now collaborating closely to tackle global warming. Pressure is building within the US to create a national integrated scheme on the foundations of its regional efforts, and other major emitters, like Brazil and Russia, are contemplating similar measures.
Australia’s Direct Action Plan cannot easily be linked to this growing global carbon market. Its underfunded “reverse auction” process cannot acquire sufficient emissions to meet even Australia’s 2020 target. Its “safeguard mechanism” is unlikely to require major Australian emitters to reduce their emissions significantly. Australia is now transparently out of step with global trends and, relying only on current measures, incapable of meeting the tougher mitigation targets which will be required of it in the near future.
We then get our joke of an environmental minister (cough Greg Hunt cough) pretending that's not true on live television and getting called on it by the host on the show Q & A. He then shifts the goalpost and states that he will guarantee that China will not continue with the scheme.
Anyone who actually bothers to google would know since 2014 China already planned to make their emissions trading scheme national, but now its been formally announced during the meeting with the US.
I am going to predict what they are going to say. They are going to shift the goalposts some more, and say,
1. "Yeah China is doing something, but its not enough," where "enough" will be some arbitrary value which will be whatever number as convenient.
I am just going to add that anyone who could bother to spend, say 5 minutes of googling could find out that China's carbon emissions declined in 2014 and continued to decline in the first 4 months of this year.
2. China's carbon emissions decline because the economy is doing badly. It will pick up again once their economy recovers.
Lets give it to them that 7.4% growth last year is "bad." Also its certainly true that carbon emissions decreased during bad economic times due to decrease need for energy. For example the former Soviet states had decreased carbon emissions when the USSR collapsed, however the case can't be applied to China because... power generation still grew 3.2% in 2014 despite the slowing economy. Thus the only way for carbon emissions to decline by 2% yet have energy use increase by 3.2% is that China is using less carbon intensive methods to generate power. This isn't really a hard concept, but I have run across someone who found this primary school level concept hard to grasp.