Hi delegates!
Today I want to discuss a somewhat less glamorous facet of the US-China relationship: climate change. Although climate change is not as combative as a topic as, for example, trade wars or militaristic posturing, it is still a critical issue that is sure to see much increased attention in the upcoming years.
China is the world's largest total carbon dioxide emissions producer, but the United States is second (by a fairly significant margin). And while the process hasn't been completely smooth, recent cooperation between these two superproducers paved the way to new agreements that seemed to be a promising step in cutting carbon emissions. However, as the Trump Administration took office, the US President announced that the United States would exit the 2015 Paris Protocol and his intent to undo many of Obama’s climate control initiatives, framing the agreement as undermining and damaging to the US economy.
Trump’s position actually bears certain similarities to the Chinese position on climate change. It is important to realize that China has undergone extremely rapid industrialization over the past few decades – an industrialization that has seen its large population rapidly purchasing new, modern appliances which in turn necessitate the cheap electrical power of coal. To China, it’s unfair to expect their still developing countries to follow the same strict energy regulations for countries that industrialized over a century prior. In the Paris Protocol, China agreed to slightly different types of emissions regulations, such as a cap on carbon intensity, and is widely agreed to be more than on track for its 2030 goal of carbon emissions peak. This comes from increased production of natural gas, renewable sources, and even an attempt at a carbon market.
To be sure, a lot of China’s improvement in carbon emissions come from domestic sources, such as an innately changing economy and public concern over air quality. But the question still remains – without the pressure of the United States, will China continue this track of climate policy? Will they become the ones pressuring the rest of the world to cut back on emissions? Will the United States finalize its exit of the Paris Accords, and if so, what are the superpower’s next steps?
Just some questions to think about or discuss!
Today I want to discuss a somewhat less glamorous facet of the US-China relationship: climate change. Although climate change is not as combative as a topic as, for example, trade wars or militaristic posturing, it is still a critical issue that is sure to see much increased attention in the upcoming years.
China is the world's largest total carbon dioxide emissions producer, but the United States is second (by a fairly significant margin). And while the process hasn't been completely smooth, recent cooperation between these two superproducers paved the way to new agreements that seemed to be a promising step in cutting carbon emissions. However, as the Trump Administration took office, the US President announced that the United States would exit the 2015 Paris Protocol and his intent to undo many of Obama’s climate control initiatives, framing the agreement as undermining and damaging to the US economy.
Trump’s position actually bears certain similarities to the Chinese position on climate change. It is important to realize that China has undergone extremely rapid industrialization over the past few decades – an industrialization that has seen its large population rapidly purchasing new, modern appliances which in turn necessitate the cheap electrical power of coal. To China, it’s unfair to expect their still developing countries to follow the same strict energy regulations for countries that industrialized over a century prior. In the Paris Protocol, China agreed to slightly different types of emissions regulations, such as a cap on carbon intensity, and is widely agreed to be more than on track for its 2030 goal of carbon emissions peak. This comes from increased production of natural gas, renewable sources, and even an attempt at a carbon market.
To be sure, a lot of China’s improvement in carbon emissions come from domestic sources, such as an innately changing economy and public concern over air quality. But the question still remains – without the pressure of the United States, will China continue this track of climate policy? Will they become the ones pressuring the rest of the world to cut back on emissions? Will the United States finalize its exit of the Paris Accords, and if so, what are the superpower’s next steps?
Just some questions to think about or discuss!
It is clear that climate change is a highly sensitive and debated issue within the United States. While the president has removed climate change from the national security strategy, I still strongly believe climate change is a serious threat to the United States and its people.
ReplyDeleteClimate change is impacting stability in areas of the world where our American troops are operating. I have dutifully noted the thawing open water routes that now exist in the Arctic and the long droughts affecting politically unstable areas within the Middle-East. These obstacles pose multiple dire challenges to our troops and defense planners. As a result, it is evident that climate change is a real time issue, not simply a passing phase.
In my past military career, I have even made gains to improve the impact the military has on the environment because of the effects of climate change. This includes the Joint Operating Environment, a document that lists climate change as one of the security threats the military is expected to confront over the next 25 years when I was the commander of the U.S. Joint Forces Command in 2010. I have also pledged to make improvements in the military’s use of fossil fuels, with the military using nearly 117 million barrels of oil in 2011, noting that this massive amount of oil is producing tremendous amounts of greenhouse gases that are affecting the global climate.
However, while I do believe climate change is a serious threat, if the emissions the military is producing results in the national security of the United States being protected, then these gases, however harmful, are worth producing if the American people are safe.
On the subject of the Paris Accords and the president’s intentions to withdraw the United States , my opinion here doesn’t really matter. While my defense department obviously is making gains in dealing with the aspects of climate change, it is frankly not in my portfolio to join my voice in such a debate. All I can say, as I’ve said thousands of times before to the international world, is that the president will make the right choice in the end. All we need to do now is trust his judgement when the time comes.
While the United States would love to work with China on this issue, as it is something that plagues both of our countries, I cannot, in good confidence, sign off on such agreement as of now. China is the United States main security threat going forward. They are attempting to disrupt are economy, to destroy our international prestige, and thwarting our attempts at creating peace in the Korean Peninsula by protecting the dictator Kim Jong-Un.
If China truly wants America to help them on the issue of climate change, China must prove themselves to our country that they are no threat to us. They must show this by sorting out the aforementioned qualms that our country has about them. They must show through action, not words, that they are equitable partners in the battle against climate change, that America can trust them. If China meets these requirements, then of course the United States and China could work together on this issue. However, until these standards are met, the United States cannot make an accord with the dangerous China.
-Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis
Works Cited
Borger, Julian. “James Mattis Asks US Allies to 'Bear with Us' amid Backlash over Isolationism.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 3 June 2017, www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/03/james-mattis-donald-trump-paris-climate-accord-isolationism.
“China, Russia More of a 'Threat' to US than Terror: Mattis.” SBS News, 19 Jan. 2018, www.sbs.com.au/news/china-russia-more-of-a-threat-to-us-than-terror-mattis.
“The Elephant in Paris – the Military and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” New Internationalist, 5 July 2017, newint.org/blog/2015/11/19/the-military-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions.
Revkin, Andrew. “Trump's Defense Secretary Cites Climate Change as National Security Challenge.” ProPublica, www.propublica.org/article/trumps-defense-secretary-cites-climate-change-national-security-challenge.
The Bank of China stands for one thing: turning a little money into a lot of money. As CEO of the Bank, I believe that while we should strive to create a balance between profit and long term prosperity, I will not compromise our goals as a bank in order to combat this non-threatening issue. The Bank of China will continue to levy loans to institutions regardless of their emission rate. Factories, cars, and air buses create jobs, move capital, and proliferate welfare.
ReplyDeleteLax regulations have allowed China to dominate the global marketplace by having the cheapest factories, workers, and real estate. It is in China’s best interest to keep true to our current path. It has allowed us to enjoy great success and economic growth. Foreign investors continue to believe in Chinese industries because they know that what they say the company should do will happen because there are no regulations preventing it.
In terms of green energy, the Bank will support these endeavors. We do out of a utilitarian effort, not out of moral obligation to save the world. One day oil reserves will run dry, and humanity will be forced to find other avenues to fuel our existence. In the scalar leading up to that future, oil prices will go up, making it uneconomical for businesses to look to these sources to profit. For this reason, the Bank fully supports those practices. However, the Bank will not support this to the extent of imposing carbon taxes or cap and trade practices. As soon as economics allow green energy to flourish, the Bank will be the champion of green energy.
To say that climate change is a matter of national security is a gross over exaggeration. Such are the lies of those trying to undermine our success.
Have fewer children, raise more pigs (少生孩子多养猪) 1979
Mr.Siqing, while I respect your viewpoints on this issue as an international individual, I must reject your assertion that climate change is not a national security threat, but simply a “lie of the enemy”. That statement by yourself sir, is as facetious as the belief that climate change is a hoax perpetrated by your people. What we are experiencing is not a partisan issue; it’s a global one. If global warming results in the ice eventually melting in the North Pole, then both are countries could potentially end up underwater due to rising sea levels. Disasters in greater frequencies have plagued my country. Your country’s cities have more smog days then clean air ones. The point I’m trying to make here is that if this issue goes unaddressed by both of our nations, it could result in the death of millions of people. That alone makes it a national security issue in my eyes, even if others in my country do not support my viewpoint.
DeleteI will say once more that the United States would love to work with China on stopping climate change. However, at this moment, we cannot due to predatory economics that you sir, support. If you change your ways, if you show the United States that you and your country are not a threat to us, then addressing climate change can just be the first step in both of our countries working together on global issues. Until that day comes, we cannot trust you and therefore cannot work with you on such an agreement unless a vast improvement is made in your country. For now, understand that climate change being a national security issue is not a lie, but the blatant truth, a truth you and I must deal with or suffer the consequences of our inaction in the future.
-Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis
Works Cited
Revkin, Andrew. “Trump's Defense Secretary Cites Climate Change as National Security Challenge.” ProPublica, www.propublica.org/article/trumps-defense-secretary-cites-climate-change-national-security-challenge.
As the CEO of Walmart, I am confident that climate change is a real global issue, and that it is my responsibility as the leader of the world’s largest retailer to bring attention to this long standing problem. Our products and services have already reached the far edges of the world, with Sam’s Club in China and the Seiyu Group in Japan, having first started our business here in the United States. While it is truly unfortunate that our president has chosen to step away from the Paris Accords, I strongly believe that it is each businesses’ prerogative to step forward and implement energy conservation frameworks, since it is in their best interests in the long term. As Siemens states, 93% of CEOs believe that sustainability is important for their company’s future success, due to customer demand for greener products. Not only is this good for the environment, but for businesses, it will save money in the long run, according to Louis Bergeron, a Stanford University Science News Service writer. My company has its Global Sourcing Headquarters in Shenzhen, which is located in Southern China, due to the fact that China has much potential to grow as an even larger economic giant in a few years. Because of our successes, I continue to support China’s endeavor to expand their influence in their worldwide market, and will also continue to support our endeavor to decrease emissions and energy usage in Walmart. China has also supported reducing carbon emissions by switching to more sustainable energy sources, with their plan to increase their Solar PV deployment for 2020, as well as plans for wind deployment.
ReplyDeleteSave Money, Live Better - Walmart
Citations
Bergeron, L. (2018). Shifting to 100% Renewable Energy Would Save Money. [online] Renewableenergyworld.com. Available at: http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2009/10/shifting-the-world-to-100-renewable-energy-by-2030-may-reduce-world-power-demand-by-30.html [Accessed 1 Mar. 2018].
Downloads.siemens.com. (2018). Siemens.com. [online] Available at: https://www.downloads.siemens.com/download-center/Download.aspx?pos=download&fct=getasset&id1=A6V10601366 [Accessed 1 Mar. 2018].
Whats ur email?
Delete-Sec of Energy