Latest comments posted about A new approach at Copenhagen (2) on ChinaDialogue en-gb http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/2895-A-new-approach-at-Copenhagen-2- http://staging.chinadialogue.net/images/cdlogo.gif http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/2895-A-new-approach-at-Copenhagen-2- Not only does Professor Hu seem to lack even the most basic understanding of the international process of climate change treaties, negotiations and so on; he also seems to have a rather wayward understanding of China's own situation. If we are to believe him, "China is still considered a developing country, with no emissions reduction responsibilities, commitments or contributions." In fact, this is a mistake. Obviously, when countries like Singapore or Saudi Arabia with a per capita GDP of over 10,000 yuan are still thought of as developing countries, there are no question marks over the 'developing' status of a nation as poor as China. Nevertheless, it has made commitments. As a signatory to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, it has made an active pledge to fight climate change under the framework of sustainable development. So China's contributions to date have actually been very significant. By contrast, virtually none of the developed countries that set themselves emissions targets all those years ago have fulfilled their commitments. Greenhouse gas emissions are still rising - and these are countries that have been developing for some hundreds of years! Professor Hu's bizarre question of whether China's national interests are the same as those of human development almost leads one to suspect that he is a European or American economist, and not in fact Chinese at all! Wed, 22 Apr 2009 06:13:10 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8765 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8765 The unique qualities of China's energy framework mean that there is definite potential for it to see through a major reduction in emissions. The main issue is how it goes about its work in saving energy and reducing consumption. There's also the question of how it will develop alternatives like water, wind and solar energy. Thu, 16 Apr 2009 16:07:56 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8733 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8733 China's civil society should join the Global Climate movement on behalf of the interest of Chinese. Thu, 16 Apr 2009 16:23:38 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8736 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8736 I would say that the good results of China for the year 2008 are mainly due to the olympic games. China is unique in the world by its desire to strengthen the targets to reach rather than to diminish them because of the economic crunch, on the model of EU pushing later, once more, the goal it has been fixed this year. China by setting highers targets through the HDI measure would be grasping an opportunity to become more independant of the US dollars because the financement of the reduction of the emissions of greenhouse gaz may be done in Renminbi in every countries of Asia. Sun, 12 Apr 2009 11:03:22 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8714 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8714 TOCE means a ton of the standard coals,not a name of chemical substance.Here to give an explanation. (translated by diaoshuhuan) Thu, 09 Apr 2009 08:53:37 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8696 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8696 I think that the meaning of the commentator above is that China's economic energy laws isn't actually about energy conservation laws. That law is for universal use... (Translated by Braden Latham-Jones.) Thu, 09 Apr 2009 08:47:25 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8695 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8695 What I have actually meant above is that we even don't know who are the members in our national climate change delegate in Bonn and Copenhagen or anywhere.That is why I am curious who are they, are they qualified enough to speak on behalf of the state. There are many mistakes of the translation, as always. And translation is above all the most serious issue today in China. Wed, 08 Apr 2009 20:42:39 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8684 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8684 You are right that it would be good to know who is posting in this discussion, though I do not agree that discussion is pointless. We do not require contributors to sign their comments, but the editorial team at chinadialogue would certainly welcome it if they did, including, of course, the author of comment number 6 Isabel Hilton Wed, 08 Apr 2009 18:14:15 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8681 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8681 It is known to energy industry insiders that many firms have cooked their books to look good in regard to energy efficiency improvements in the past 3 years. We have almost everything in place including the Energy Conservation Law and we have enforced a nation-wide energy audit of large energy consumers, for example any firm with a total consumption exceeding 10,000 TOCE. Suddenly a lot of energy auditing firms sprung up and made a fortune by auditing service, with a price roughly 50,000RMB per case, which is much much lower in western standard but huge profitable for these Chinese firms. The only year that actually hit the annual energy reduction target is the year 2008, and it is largely due to the economic recession in the manufacturing sectors, not because we have significant achievements on the energy efficiency part. By this sense it is also dubious that as we have the mandatory energy targets during the 11th 5-year plan which is a 20% reduction,yet we can not come to the conclusion that we can have a mandatory emission reduction for the international community. It means we actually can not deliver that target in whatever means. And what is worse, I am afraid that the.... Wed, 08 Apr 2009 21:24:47 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8687 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8687 Many of us criticise instinctively, but don't consciously reduce our emissions. We have many experts, whether they are famous economists or unknown ones who want to be famous, but in reality we need climate economists who are experienced and famous. Unfortunately, we don't have them. So, all the discussion is nonsense. Even one million comments won't solve any problems. We even don't know who the members of the discussion are. Tue, 07 Apr 2009 21:14:31 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8666 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/2895#comment-8666