Atmospheric harmful emissions from China

[FaxModem1]

National Post

Scientists discover China has been secretly emitting banned ozone-depleting gas
Scientists found that between 40 and 60 per cent of the total global CFC-11 emissions originated from eastern China

According to a new study published May 22, 2019, monitoring stations in Japan and Korea found that 40 to 60 per cent of global CFC-11 emissions originated from eastern mainland China.UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL
Jacob Dubé
Jacob Dubé
May 22, 2019
2:55 PM EDT

A chemical banned around the globe for the last 30 years has made an unfortunate resurgence. And all signs, in a new study, point to China as the culprit.

In the 1980s, countries came together to sign The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, a landmark treaty designed to halt and reduce the production of chlorofluorocarbons (CFC), chemicals used in fridges and foams that had the side effect of tearing through the Earth’s ozone layer.

The Montreal Protocol has been signed by 197 countries around the world, including Canada, the U.S., and China. As the ozone layer in our upper atmosphere slowly depleted — letting in an increasing amount of the sun’s ultraviolet rays — the protocol contributed to a significant reduction in harmful CFCs, which then allowed for a slow healing of the damaged ozone layer.

That is until last year, when scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association found that global emissions of Trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11) have actually been increasing since 2013.

The increase implied that someone was secretly violating the Montreal Protocol. But the limitations of measuring devices meant the location of the polluter could only be traced to somewhere in east Asia.

Now, in a new study published in Nature on May 22, scientists from the University of Bristol, Kyungpook National University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that between 40 and 60 per cent of total global CFC-11 emissions originate from eastern China.

With the help of an international network of measurement devices designed to identify and track gases in the atmosphere, the team behind the study found that data from their devices in Korea and Japan has spiked since 2013. After analyzing weather and wind patterns to determine the origin of the gas increase, it led them to eastern mainland China, around the Shandong province.

“It wasn’t entirely a surprise,” said Matthew Rigby, lead author of the study and Reader in Atmospheric Chemistry in the School of Chemistry at the University of Bristol. A few months after the initial report was released last year, both the Environmental Investigation Agency and the New York Times published reports in which Chinese manufacturers in the region confirmed they were using CFC-11 in the production of foams.

Someone in Asia is making a banned chemical that destroys the ozone layer, scientists suspect
The UN says the Earth’s ozone layer is healing, and should be completely repaired by the 2030s
Manufacturers told the EIA they continued to use the banned product because of its better quality and cheaper price. The New York Times reported that some factories were producing the gas in secret, while other manufacturers said the local governments turned a blind eye.

However, Rigby said scientists and watchdogs didn’t know just how much manufacturers in China were emitting — about 7,000 tonnes of CFC-11 since 2013 in that area alone.

“That’s more than double the emissions we were expecting from China at the time,” he said. “Was this enough to account for a substantial fraction of the global emissions rise that we saw? What we’ve found in this study is that, yes, it is globally significant.”

Rigby also mentions that CFC-11 is a greenhouse gas, about “5,000 times more potent than carbon dioxide at warming the climate.”

The Chinese government has been cracking down on illegal CFC-11 manufacturers and shutting down production facilities and Rigby hopes this new study will help law enforcement officials in their search for illicit producers.

Due to the limited locations of their monitoring network, Rigby said the study team cannot conclusively determine where the rest of the CFC emissions are coming from, pointing out they have no information on regions such as South America, western China and India.

According to a 2018 United Nations report, due to the progress of the Montreal Protocol, the huge ozone hole that forms above Antarctica could be completely healed by the mid-century.

But Rigby said if the increased emissions from eastern China aren’t stopped soon, the healing process could be delayed by “potentially decades.”

I wait for the China apologists on this board to make comments about it being okay because they're competing against the US.

[Jub]

China apologists... Is that even a thing on this forum? Also, why is everything any factory in China does a China issue as opposed to an issue with that factory? I know that most things are to some extent state-run, but that doesn't mean every foible can be traced back to the national government.

That said, this is certainly shitty and takes a big chunk out of the progress China's recent clean energy push has made. Hopefully, they recognize how bad this chemical is and crack down on it and those manufacturing it appropriately.

[K. A. Pital]

The Chinese government has been cracking down on illegal CFC-11 manufacturers and shutting down production facilities and Rigby hopes this new study will help law enforcement officials in their search for illicit producers.

Looks like it is smart crapitalists who are the problem.

Capitalism is the concentration of wealth and cleanliness on one side, in Elysiums, and shittification of everything else everywhere. And Chinese capitalism is not a solution for the problems which capitalism cannot solve. Bans and government punishment are direly needed - otherwise greed takes priority.

[The Romulan Republic]

China apologists... Is that even a thing on this forum?

Yes. I'm sure that soon we'll have multiple posts accusing this thread of being racist/imperialist Western propaganda, and/or listing every bad thing the West has ever done for Whataboutism/deflection.

Also, why is everything any factory in China does a China issue as opposed to an issue with that factory? I know that most things are to some extent state-run, but that doesn't mean every foible can be traced back to the national government.

Fair enough. There needs to be evidence that a particular policy was sanctioned or permitted by the State.

That said, this is certainly shitty and takes a big chunk out of the progress China's recent clean energy push has made. Hopefully, they recognize how bad this chemical is and crack down on it and those manufacturing it appropriately.

If they weren't doing it with state approval (or possibly even if they were- fall guys and all that), there's a fair chance they'll get the death penalty. Wouldn't be the first time the Chinese government executed people for unsafe business practices that resulted in a high profile scandal, IIRC.

[Jub]

Yes. I'm sure that soon we'll have multiple posts accusing this thread of being racist/imperialist Western propaganda, and/or listing every bad thing the West has ever done for Whataboutism/deflection.

On this front, there are valid things that could be said about the west even specifically related to CFCs. We knew how bad they were as far back as 1978 when they were banned from aerosol cans but didn't ban them (outside of very narrow uses) until 1997 nearly a twenty-year gap where only partial steps were taken. That's damage that can't be easily undone and there are still literal megatons of the stuff just waiting to be released as old appliances break down and are scrapped.

There's also the fact that the west has a greater per capita purchasing power and yet isn't pushing as aggressively for green energy as China is. Not that China isn't currently starting from a worse place but that's to be expected of a rapidly developed nation which by necessity needs to do some things cheap and dirty to catch up.

If they weren't doing it with state approval (or possibly even if they were- fall guys and all that), there's a fair chance they'll get the death penalty. Wouldn't be the first time the Chinese government executed people for unsafe business practices that resulted in a high profile scandal, IIRC.

There have certainly been cases where that's happened though usually, that's in cases where the product directly caused deaths or grievous harm such as the lead paint scandal or the tainted formula fiasco; this case seems less open to that sort of thing though. That said, as much as nothing* deserves the death penalty, I'd almost rather see that as a punishment in cases like this where worldwide damage is caused than see it used for a murderer who only killed one person.

*There are extremes where a person is so dangerous or has committed Nazi level war crimes where I feel the death penalty could apply. Though I expect the trials, appeals, and questioning of the condemned will take upwards of a decade in the modern political climate.

[mr friendly guy]

I wait for the China apologists on this board to make comments about it being okay because they're competing against the US.

I saw this story (from another source obviously looking at the date) some time ago. I am glad the Chinese government is cracking down on illegal CFC producers, but obviously some slip through the net. I am also optismistic given that the ozone layer hole is still closing. I am also curious since your own article states the Chinese government are cracking down on them, what do you think a Chinese apologist would do other than support the government line? I won't even bother to ask who you think the apologists are, because I have a feeling I already know.

China apologists... Is that even a thing on this forum?

SDN definition of Chinese apologist

1. Someone who points out if we apply the same standard on China as we do to Western nations, they would get a few hail Marys and a slap on the wrist.

2. Someone who points out the narrative of Chinese bad, <insert their political opponent here> good, is grossly simplistic and is pretty much propaganda.

3. Someone who insults an anti chinese poster and gets them triggered. Said poster described the murderer of 4 Chinese girls as "fighting oppression," just to put things in context.

Also, why is everything any factory in China does a China issue as opposed to an issue with that factory? I know that most things are to some extent state-run, but that doesn't mean every foible can be traced back to the national government.

Most probably from the same logic we apply to Islamic terrorists and white Christian terrorists. Islam is a collective, so actions on a few reflect on the majority, whereas a white Christian terrorist is a "lone wolf."

To elaborate further on the likelihood of it being a government run factory, a quick search estimates that 60% of China's economy is from the private sector rather than state owned enterprises, which would make this even less probable. Now I don't know every state owned enterprise, but I thought the Chinese government keeps its hands on the enterprises which can exert control on "levers of the economy" when it needs to. For example finance (state own banks), utilities (power generation) and infrastructure (since they can boost the economy by spending on infrastructure, a good example of the CCP maintaing control is companies involved in high speed rail). Now I suppose a foam company could be still on the books for Chinese SOEs, but it seems less likely. In any event they need to clamp down on this whether private or government.

That said, this is certainly shitty and takes a big chunk out of the progress China's recent clean energy push has made. Hopefully, they recognize how bad this chemical is and crack down on it and those manufacturing it appropriately.

We can do some back of the envelop calculations to see. Lets take the CFC as 7000 tonnes from the article. Not all of it is illegal, some I assume can be from break down of old appliances, but lets count the whole lot. Its warming capacity is 5000 times carbon dioxide, so that comes to 35 million tonnes of co2 equivalent since 2013, or around 7 million tonnes a year of CO2 equivalent.

In 2018 alone China installed 45000 MW capacity of solar. Now I know roughly 2 kw of solar can save about 700-1000 kg of CO2, at least in Australia.
https://www.solarmarket.com.au/carbon-r ... ar-panels/
Fortunately China has a similar coal mix to us. So to underestimate, I will say 2 kw saves 700 kg of CO2, so 1 kw saves 350 kg. 45000 MW x 1000 to convert to kw, so 45 million kw, and saves around 31.5 million tonnes of CO2 annually. That's just solar. China added another 23000 MW capacity in wind power in 2018. However while solar and wind get more attention, they are actually less than hydropower. Since 2013, china has added another 39000 MW capacity of hydro. I am going assume that they save even more than solar, since rivers kind of always flow while solar energy calcs assume the sun shining for a few hours a day.

That's easily more than the 7 million tonnes annually of CO2 equivalent. So it certainly takes a chunk out, and I think they should clamp down, but it most probably isn't that large a chunk compared to what China is doing. But I suspect for putting this in context, I would most probably be labelled a Chinese apologist.

[FaxModem1]

I wait for the China apologists on this board to make comments about it being okay because they're competing against the US.

I saw this story (from another source obviously looking at the date) some time ago. I am glad the Chinese government is cracking down on illegal CFC producers, but obviously some slip through the net. I am also optimistic given that the ozone layer hole is still closing. I am also curious since your own article states the Chinese government are cracking down on them, what do you think a Chinese apologist would do other than support the government line? I won't even bother to ask who you think the apologists are, because I have a feeling I already know.

Well, they claim to be a communist country, and not a capitalist fascist one, maybe they should nationalize said companies? Or have more stringent inspections? You know, prove that China isn't just corruption personified and only punishing those that get caught when they get embarrassed?

China apologists... Is that even a thing on this forum?

SDN definition of Chinese apologist

1. Someone who points out if we apply the same standard on China as we do to Western nations, they would get a few hail Marys and a slap on the wrist.[/quote]

How many China threads do we get on this forum compared to Western ones? How often is the 'West' derided? How often is China?

Because on the first page alone, I see almost nothing but threads about Western nations falling apart.

[mr friendly guy]

Well, they claim to be a communist country, and not a capitalist fascist one, maybe they should nationalize said companies? Or have more stringent inspections? You know, prove that China isn't just corruption personified and only punishing those that get caught when they get embarrassed?

The answer to your question is because they are changing from a communist run economy to a more capitalistic one, so gradually the government's grip on the sectors of the economy has gradually loosen. Thus you expect SOE to make up a smaller portion of the economy. That's why they won't nationalise such companies.

Not that it answers the point, why would you expect a Chinese apologist to go against the party line of cracking down on these enterprises? Shouldn't they support whatever the government is doing right or wrong? Isn't that what an apologist does?

BTW, how do you know they don't punish those that get caught if no embarrassment is associated. It sounds like an unfalsifiable claim there buddy. If air pollution improves because they crack down on factories who are breaking the rules, you can just say, well that's because they were embarrassed. The fact that years prior they announced they were going to crack down, why that's just coincidence.

How many China threads do we get on this forum compared to Western ones? How often is the 'West' derided? How often is China?

Because on the first page alone, I see almost nothing but threads about Western nations falling apart.

Because TRR posts most of these threads. I don't think he knows much about China, nor is what happening in China going to affect him as much as what happens in his own country. Not that posting a lot of "anti western" threads makes one a shrill for China.

I could post more interesting Chinese articles, but frankly this board is not likely so interested in them as opposed to say one with a section dedicated to China, like Pakistandefence.com. Which might explain why people don't post Chinese threads here, because a lot of people aren't going to be interested. There are a few posters back in the day who provided good insights into China, Pelranius, Lusankanya, myself, KA Pital, montypython etc. Myself and KA Pital sort of post regularly, montypython occasionally appears in the STO thread, but has been quiet lately. KA Pital and myself have limited contact with Lusankanya these days, so basically there are less people interested in China posting here, so it doesn't seem worth the effort to go into China related stories. I can get them elsewhere even if I know the discussion on other boards may not be to the standard of SDN.

[Jub]

Well, they claim to be a communist country, and not a capitalist fascist one, maybe they should nationalize said companies? Or have more stringent inspections? You know, prove that China isn't just corruption personified and only punishing those that get caught when they get embarrassed?

This still means figuring out which non-state run factories are producing illegal materials which, especially in buttfuck nowhere (western China) is going to mean sending teams out to check virtually everywhere. That's just not practical to do on a regular basis and if Chinese inspections are anything like Canadian inspections people get tipped off that they're coming and can hide the worst of their offenses pretty easily.

How many China threads do we get on this forum compared to Western ones? How often is the 'West' derided? How often is China?

Because on the first page alone, I see almost nothing but threads about Western nations falling apart.

What percentage of our board's membership lives in China versus North America, Europe, and Australia and of that percentage how many of them are active in N&P? Of that active in N&P percentage how many commonly start new threads?

It makes sense that we see articles from and about where our members live rather than about Africa, India, and China where we have far fewer members.

[FaxModem1]

Well, they claim to be a communist country, and not a capitalist fascist one, maybe they should nationalize said companies? Or have more stringent inspections? You know, prove that China isn't just corruption personified and only punishing those that get caught when they get embarrassed?

The answer to your question is because they are changing from a communist run economy to a more capitalistic one, so gradually the government's grip on the sectors of the economy has gradually loosen. Thus you expect SOE to make up a smaller portion of the economy. That's why they won't nationalise such companies.

Not that it answers the point, why would you expect a Chinese apologist to go against the party line of cracking down on these enterprises? Shouldn't they support whatever the government is doing right or wrong? Isn't that what an apologist does?

BTW, how do you know they don't punish those that get caught if no embarrassment is associated. It sounds like an unfalsifiable claim there buddy. If air pollution improves because they crack down on factories who are breaking the rules, you can just say, well that's because they were embarrassed. The fact that years prior they announced they were going to crack down, why that's just coincidence.

Maybe an apologist will just say that whatever is happening is okay, because China is doing all it can?

How many China threads do we get on this forum compared to Western ones? How often is the 'West' derided? How often is China?

Because on the first page alone, I see almost nothing but threads about Western nations falling apart.

Because TRR posts most of these threads. I don't think he knows much about China, nor is what happening in China going to affect him as much as what happens in his own country. Not that posting a lot of "anti western" threads makes one a shrill for China.

I could post more interesting Chinese articles, but frankly this board is not likely so interested in them as opposed to say one with a section dedicated to China, like Pakistandefence.com. Which might explain why people don't post Chinese threads here, because a lot of people aren't going to be interested. There are a few posters back in the day who provided good insights into China, Pelranius, Lusankanya, myself, KA Pital, montypython etc. Myself and KA Pital sort of post regularly, montypython occasionally appears in the STO thread, but has been quiet lately. KA Pital and myself have limited contact with Lusankanya these days, so basically there are less people interested in China posting here, so it doesn't seem worth the effort to go into China related stories. I can get them elsewhere even if I know the discussion on other boards may not be to the standard of SDN.

Well, it'd certainly give a more well rounded perspective than what I will find here, on the interwebs, or on Reddit.

[mr friendly guy]

Well, it'd certainly give a more well rounded perspective than what I will find here, on the interwebs, or on Reddit.

What exactly about China are in interested in? Mine is economic, environmental, energy generation, infrastructure, cultural, entertainment, technological development etc. An infrastructure thread for example, can span more than 200 pages for those who are interested. I suspect it would barely get a mention here except for some ignorant person crying out about how it will break wah wah. And yes that happened before when Mr Coffee (before he got banned) posted a thread about the longest bridge, built in China.

Another example of a thread I was involved in was in 2010 I posted when China surpassed the US to be the largest country in terms of wind power capacity. Thanas of course, just took a dump on that saying that their wind capacity per capita is low compared to the glorious EU. Lets just say, amazing what a few years make. Of course I couldn't exactly say in 2010, just you wait, they'll beat the EU in five years could I.

My point is, things I am interested in about China, might not be the interest of others here and won't generate interest, so why post? I try to focus on things which might generate interest, like pollution threads for example, but obviously these would be few and far between. Even if someone posts those threads, it might attract people who just want to go LOL China ha ha ha, so it seems like I would be better serve participating in other threads. I can only suggest if you want other perspectives, find somewhere Chinese nationalists hang out and then you'll definitely get another perspective. You might even find useful articles and information in between all the flame wars that occur on such boards.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Another example of a thread I was involved in was in 2010 I posted when China surpassed the US to be the largest country in terms of wind power capacity. Thanas of course, just took a dump on that saying that their wind capacity per capita is low compared to the glorious EU. Lets just say, amazing what a few years make. Of course I couldn't exactly say in 2010, just you wait, they'll beat the EU in five years could I.

Without knowing more about the context of the exchange you're referencing, I don't really understand what about this is so upsetting to you, unless Thanas were lying about the wind capacity thing. It feels like you are trying to portray that as China-bashing or some sort of blind hatred the board culture here has for all things China, but I don't really see how pointing out that the EU has more wind power production fits that bill.

China is just like the U.S., or the E.U., or any other country. There are plenty of positive AND negative things that can be said about it. Saying positive things doesn't make you an "apologist", and saying negative things doesn't make you a "hater" or however you choose to label it. Neither opinion should be dismissed, and it seems a little silly to me to essentially boycott discussion of a topic because you don't like that not everyone agrees with you on China.

For the record, I'm interested in talking about China. I'd be happy to have an on-going thread about the Belt & Road Initiative, for example, and all of the consequences (both positive AND negative) that have come from that. But if that thread just devolves into people arguing about the ideological purity of whether everyone is "anti" or "pro" China like this one already has, then yeah I guess you're right it's not worth it.

[mr friendly guy]

Without knowing more about the context of the exchange you're referencing, I don't really understand what about this is so upsetting to you, unless Thanas were lying about the wind capacity thing. It feels like you are trying to portray that as China-bashing or some sort of blind hatred the board culture here has for all things China, but I don't really see how pointing out that the EU has more wind power production fits that bill.

It sounded like a case of sour grapes to me. Its like if you won the world championship in <insert competition here> and I come along and say, well you're a shit in this other category. IIRC he was saying China and the US despite being number one and two in wind capacity had a ridiculously low capacity per capita. I can only assume he was comparing to the EU since very few countries other than EU ones have wind power capacity comparable China or the US in 2010. This was in the context of fighting climate change, and I had to point out his own country refuses to embrace nuclear power, which is the best candidate for non fossil fuel power generation, while China and the US does.

China is just like the U.S., or the E.U., or any other country. There are plenty of positive AND negative things that can be said about it. Saying positive things doesn't make you an "apologist", and saying negative things doesn't make you a "hater" or however you choose to label it. Neither opinion should be dismissed, and it seems a little silly to me to essentially boycott discussion of a topic because you don't like that not everyone agrees with you on China.

Agreed on the first point, but its not just "they disagree with me." Its either they are very ignorant about the topic (and it feels like how the board had to explain basic science to Creationist back in the early days), or they are a applying a different standard to how they would normally judge things. Let me show you what I mean.

If we go back to that other thread I mention about Chinese bridges. There is plenty of discussion to be had, like whether the economic benefits outweigh the costs, you could try an approximate traffic and distance saved etc. I don't think a good discussion going to be had when you ask how long until it falls down using racial stereotypes about cheap Chinese goods, when a cursory glance would tell you that in terms of longest bridges by various categories, they all made by the Chinese. That is just ignorant about Chinese infrastructure capabilities.

I also don't think its great discussion when people have to point out its unfair to malign companies which build massive infrastructure, compared to some other company which makes shitty ones just because they are both Chinese companies (this was also in the thread). Lets flip the script. If the topic was refugees and crime, no would even need to point out you can't stereotype the whole just because you have several refugees committing crimes, and there is a problem of generalising especially when numerous counter examples exist of refugees not committing crime. Yet we can point out some dodgy Chinese builds to stereotype, despite the numerous counterexamples of Chinese infrastructure of high quality. Doesn't this suggest to you, that there is an ideological blind spot here, where the rules of reasoning are applied differently depending on the topic?

For the record, I'm interested in talking about China. I'd be happy to have an on-going thread about the Belt & Road Initiative, for example, and all of the consequences (both positive AND negative) that have come from that. But if that thread just devolves into people arguing about the ideological purity of whether everyone is "anti" or "pro" China like this one already has, then yeah I guess you're right it's not worth it.

See above. Its not so much ideological purity. You can disagree with me all you like, but if the disagreement is based on ignorance of pretty basic knowledge in that field, or I sense you apply a different standard to what you would do normally, I just can't see it being too productive, except as a means to sharpening my debating skills. Frankly I got that from debating Creationists.