Latest comments posted about Do we know change when we see it? on ChinaDialogue en-gb http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/3231-Do-we-know-change-when-we-see-it- http://staging.chinadialogue.net/images/cdlogo.gif http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/3231-Do-we-know-change-when-we-see-it- Nowadays, cooperation in new sustainable energy between the US and China is an increasingly hot topic. However, many people rejoice and ask spontaneously how cooperation is to be implemented. In the energy issue, especially energy saving, serious misunderstandings having appear between the two groups which cast a cloud over the cooperation of the two nations. First, regarding the US, whether the reports from both the U.S. Brookings Institution and Pew Center on Global Climate Change or the signed article made by Steven Chu, US Department of Energy Minister, are all made a terrible mistake. As they suggested, China should give priority to building energy conservation, like many developed nations. But the fact remains that the energy consumption of manufacturing industry accounts for 70 percent of the total in China. In terms of China, during the process of negotiations on climate change, the Chinese government made two demands of the developed countries - technology transfer and economic aid. Meanwhile, the NDRC made it clear that the developed countries should provide 1% of GDP each year, approximately US$ 400 billion, for the sake of technical assistance and financial aid to China. To my knowledge, there is not any secret power-saving technology in the developed countries, let alone transfer of them. Further, there is a widespread misperception of just what energy-saving is the quantifiable factor that the reducing consumption of coal, electricity and energy. Still, some people would say in layman's terms “energy-saving is surely not money-saving.” In fact, the purpose of energy-saving is to save money, this is putting the cart before the horse. By now, Sino-US energy cooperation is just on paper and not in practice, because it's not exactly clear what two nations will be bringing to discuss. So what should we do to address the issue of cooperation on energy conservation? First, many illusions and erroneous views about the technology should be shattered. There are no widely used energy-saving tips and technologies. Maybe some industries, such as the chemical industry, have a groundbreaking technology. Surely none of them will offer aid with no strings attached. But it's worth taking some trouble over getting some other technologies of the US perfectly collaborated, such as automated lighting, highly efficient motor, energy efficiency estimation system (software and hardware) , heat insulating material, waste heat recovery system , and so on. Second, it’s necessary to analyse the problems posed by the new historical conditions in China and propose pertinent solutions. There is a marked absence of “soft”measures,not technologies. People, that is the key.From the chief executive officials in charge of energy-saving of NDRC at all levels and the designers down to boiler operators, compressor operators need to be trained to increase their consciousness,skill of energy-saving. Almost all famous universities in America offer energy-saving courses. But there is still a blank space in our higher education system. To speed up the cooperation on training of personnel in this field is a key objective. Finally, we also recognize the reality of barriers to energy conservation. China's energy supply basic monopolistic operations, such as electricity supply can only be done by 23 companies. U.S. experience shows that there is no strong support for the power companies, energy-saving will not be long-term and stable development. How to reconcile and resolve the "energy supply" and "energy saving" in contradiction is a problem. Now, the United States, some states have developed a bill to allow the power company's profits and sales of decoupling, in order to mobilize the power companies to participate in energy-saving enthusiasm and initiative. This we can learn from. Finally,it requires us to recognize some realistic obstacles in China. The energy supply in China is nearly monopolized, for example, the electric power supply is operated by the two or three companies. The American experience shows that carry forward the energy-saving enterprise in its long continuance and development needs considerable support from the power companies. Further work is needed to resolve the contradiction between "energy supply" and "energy saving". Some states of America have accumulated much experience in the field of energy conservation, which certainly merits our reference and study. Bills have been introduced in America to break up profits and sales of the power company. The goal of these Bills was to stimulate the company's initiative on energy-saving. What we mentioned above is all about the US, then how can China help the US? There are some unique cost advantages in certain industries in China. We can play an important role in the production of energy saving lamp. Recently,about 80% of the earth's total number of energy saving lamp are produced in China. Low price makes possible the low-budget of energy-saving work in the US, even the global. In my opinion, more and more energy saving lamps will be made in China. Our companies ought to seize the opportunities in energy-saving market in both the US and China. samuelzhoujc@hotmail.com （Translated by Lei Wang） Fri, 04 Sep 2009 21:54:27 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/3231#comment-9276 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/3231#comment-9276 Treaties signed by the US and China are simply too many,and few of which are actually enforced. Just ask the consultants of the U.S. Department of Energy in Beijing. (Translated by Lei Wang) Fri, 04 Sep 2009 21:50:20 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/3231#comment-9275 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/3231#comment-9275 The real fruit of the meeting lies in the new Environmental Agreement that might be successfully procured by both the US and China in the Copenhagen Conference. Mon, 31 Aug 2009 07:18:50 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/3231#comment-9260 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/3231#comment-9260 It may be a good start. I just wonder if there will be any concrete follow-ups. Translated by Catlin Fu Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:22:45 +0000 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/3231#comment-9247 http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/summary/3231#comment-9247